User talk:David notMD/Archive 4

Hydrogen Water
Hi David, I added substantial information o the hydrogen water talk page (I will not edit the actual page), including all published human trials using water to separate from the databases which also list inhalation or saline (water is used more than frequently than the other methods, at 40-50% of total trials), 4 review articles, including one just published last week, two of them discussing hydrogen water having a higher effect under a much lower dosage (1/100~). I posted other mainstream media articles with more neutral slants, and posted upfront on my conflict of interest (which I have also posted as my own page to my username, in case it is missed elsewhere). TarnavaA (talk) 16:17, 5 June 2019 (UTC)TarnavaA

Hi David, any feedback on the first draft I posted last week for review is much appreciated (the sections didn't convert properly in the talk page). I detailed my reasoning for including certain sections and stated why my bias and conflict of interest may play a role in inclusions. Appreciated, TarnavaA (talk)TarnavaA —Preceding undated comment added 20:11, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi David thanks for the post on my page, I left another message on my own. As an aside, scientifically it makes more sense to talk about the total body of research on hydrogen therapy, as many trials in rodents and even humans are replicative against the various methods (water, inhalation, saline). That said, I am unsure of the ability to speak more to it as "molecular hydrogen therapy" or something like that, and then it gets murkier talking about each section. It is also not clear when to use which method, if each method will work in each model, etc. It is still very green. Just food for thought. TarnavaA (talk)TarnavaA —Preceding undated comment added 23:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi David, just following up on this TarnavaA (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2019 (UTC)TarnavaA
 * Not sure I can get to it soon. I set up the refs and started working on text, but also replying to a reviewer of one of my Good Article nominations. Maybe I can squeeze in my rewrite of the article tomorrow, but not promising. David notMD (talk) 01:33, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

No problem, appreciate your efforts. Let me know if you're stuck on anything in the literature, etc, I am happy to help. TarnavaA (talk) 20:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)TarnavaA

Whoever edited your article David ignored all reviews and edits and simply reverted to a few horribly researched media articles.. what a shame. TarnavaA (talk)TarnavaA —Preceding undated comment added 00:22, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

This user deleted your contributions saying they were primary studies (you only referenced reviews...) 18:42, 21 August 2019‎ JzG talk contribs‎ looks like others are complaining about this user on his/her page.. may want to simply revert back to your version. Seems to have happened after someone else improperly added a ton of content. TarnavaA (talk)TarnavaA

Hi David, just pinging you as I added a comprehensive list of all human studies on hydrogen therapy to date, broken down to show replicative work and supportive work. 64 human publications to date + 14 others where post hoc anaylsis show the method dissolved H2 in water. Simply for information for yourself and future editors, not asking they be included TarnavaA (talk)TarnavaA —Preceding undated comment added 18:06, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

CYP4F2
Thank you for your suggestions on CYP4F2. I have added the references about the "Chain Shortening", and renamed the section to "Research". I have already had an experience where text with links to in vitro studies about Rutin were reverted. I will try to put them to the separate "Research" section there. -- Maxim Masiutin (talk) 15:47, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Enzyme induction and inhibition
By the way, I'm very interested, currently, in the wider area of Enzyme induction and inhibition, namely CYPs and UGT. I have edited various Wikipedia articles on them during last few weeks. But the information about this is very limited, and is mostly based on in vitro studies so far. Should you know somebody who is also interested in Enzyme induction and inhibition, please let me know. I have been diagnosed with polymorphism in some genes affecting these enzymes even before genetic tests became available and affordable. If I knew by that time how various substances can inhibit or induce some enzymes, life would have been much better then. Thank you! -- Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:32, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * My (ancient) schooling was in nutritional biochemistry, and career in health claims for dietary supplements, so no connection to academics. I wish you well for your personal health and Wikipedia editing. David notMD (talk) 16:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you have consistent data on absorption of water-soluble vitamin with oral route, particularly, group B vitamins? From what I have found, with B2 (riboflavin), after 27 mg, unspecified ("little") amount is absorbed. I have added the section Riboflavin and wrote there what I have found. As about B12, Wikipedia currently states the values of (quote) "1% to 5%". However, at Pubmed I have found figures of just "1%" (not to 5%) and another article gave "less than 1%". Other B vitamins seem to have much higher oral absorption rate, from 40% to 90%. But the data, as it is presented in Wikipedia, is not consistent. It would have been useful if the "Pharmacokinetics" section of each vitamin clearly listed the absorption rate of the oral route. Additionally, a table with oral absorption rates would have been useful at the B vitamins page. Do you have some reliable data? -- Maxim Masiutin (talk) 19:27, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * A good set of questions. Addressing will take some work. The book "Present Knowledge in Nutrition" has absorption for each B vitamin. Complex, in that for many, the higher the amount consumed, the lower the percentage. Also matters if food form or as supplement. The last edition of PKiN is 10th = 2012. The 11th is due out this July. I think it would be wise to wait for that before addressing bioavailability, either for the individual articles, or for B vitamins. For niacin, the 8th edition (2001), which is on my desk, has "Nicotinic acid and nicotinamide are rapidly absorbed from the stomach and intestine. At low concentrations absorption occurs as Na+-dependent facilitated diffusion, but at higher concentration passive diffusion predominates. Three to four g of niacin given orally can be almost completely absorbed." David notMD (talk) 20:19, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * We can remove the data, on which we have only partial information, from the Pharmacokinetics section in the articles that are nominated, and put this data to articles that are not nominated. For example, if an article "B vitamins" is not nominated, we can put the data there, until we have the full picture.
 * I will not be participating until I finish the Niacin Good Article review. David notMD (talk) 10:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Competence is required
Hi David,

You helped me out over at the Teahouse a week or two ago. I have a question I’d prefer not to post there at the risk of being misunderstood. I have not interacted with that editor again, but I have kept tabs on their activity. I am wondering if this might be a case where Competence is required applies. This editor seems to be acting in good faith but by my estimation their contributions don’t meet the standard of competence. As a beginner I realize I may be misinterpreting the rule and overestimating the level of English mastery required to edit Wikipedia, so I’m asking for your opinion as well as any other advice you may have. If I have indeed misunderstood the rule I am happy to drop it.

Thanks in advance.

Wallnot (talk) 22:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC) Wallnot (talk) 22:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * In looking at Machinexa's recent prolific edits, I continue to see a pattern of addition of near-useless information (chemical composition) and adding text with references where the references do not support the text. In many instances has been reverted, and various editors have left cautions on the user's Talk page, but I do not see an improvement in quality (I just did a batch of Undo). More warnings may help, but I suspect this may need Administrator action to block. I will add a caution on M's Talk page. David notMD (talk) 22:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Biotin
I saw that you also edited the Biotin article. I have made a few edits from 28 June 2020 onwards. The essence of the edits is the following. There were information presented in the article that intestinal bacteria synthesize biotin and it is also an additional source for humans. I have removed the statement that it is a source for humans, and found a source that states the opposite. -- Maxim Masiutin (talk) 11:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I noticed ...
an article in a local newspaper, which I'd like to make a brief comment on in "In the media". The question always comes up on whether I should identify the author. It's been suggested to me that you're something of an expert on this question. So whadaya think? Smallbones( smalltalk ) 20:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Not an expert on anything, but if an author is named for an article, I saw include that. A different question is whether a "local newspaper" is a valid reliable source. David notMD (talk) 00:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah... or are you referring to "Maynard in Wikipedia," a column recently published in several Massachusetts newspapers that are in the Gatehouse/Gannett family. In that case, an editor has added a mention of the article on the Talk page of Maynard, Massachusetts. And named me as author. David notMD (talk) 13:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Ultrasonic algae control
Hello David

I have been using the system to control algae myself and for friends in garden and swimming ponds. This is why the page was created with some help of a friend, who cannot assist me anymore.

You commented:

Ref #4 goes to content not relevant to algae. Ref #5 does not work. If you have a COI - for example work in the ultrasound/algae industry, need to state that on your User page. Reviewing of a submitted draft can be days to weeks, but also as long as months. David notMD (talk) 09:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

As tried to delete #4 & #5 but could not find out how. Would it be possible for you to amend it to be correct? I really have not much experience in this and appreciate all assistance.

Best regards Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by SB2BC (talk • contribs) 13:36, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

/* AFC */ KC Pandey
Hello David! I have tried to make all the changes advised on my draft Draft:K. C. Pandey for which I am really thankful. I have stated on my talk page that there's no WP:COI on my AfC It would really nice of you if you please give a look at the draft & suggest If its ok to get published or it's still lacking something. I do understand the time constraint with you but at the same time I must admit that directly jumping on AfC was a mistake but it was inspired by Biography of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranbir_Chander_Sobti .I read all about AfC and considered myself good enough to go for it. But now after kind guidance & repeated amendments & changes, I feel the draft good enough to be published. I will be obliged if you please give 1 more look & suggest. I am still learning so I accept I must be making a lot more mistakes compared to others, but wont take long to understand the process now. Thanks once again & eagerly waiting to listen from you. Shekhar in (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Nonprofit Financial Data
Greetings, Thanks for helping with the article I've been updating on Family Caregiver Alliance. It needed a lot since it has had a template notice on there for 10 years. I deal a lot with financial data and see IRS 990s used frequently for that on many nonprofit pages since there are very rarely other sources. I understand the idea about using few primary sources and "no independent research" -- but there seriously are no other ways to find that data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihaveadreamagain (talk • contribs) 20:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC) Oops, forgot to sign -- I read this on WP:Primarysources and still think the 990 meets the requirement: "Policy: Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. Ihaveadreamagain 20:24, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!
I wanted to thank you for this edit. One of the nicest things anybody has said about me on Wikipedia since I started editing many long years ago. It is nice to see my work has not gone unnoticed. Finally good luck, I am stepping out of this specific fight since for the first time in my editing career I feel the person may actually try to figure out who I am and out me. Not that I have anything to hide but I also have a life outside of Wikipedia that I don't want disturbed by my hobby of editing Wikipedia.-- VViking Talk Edits 13:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Please can you tell me if I have actually done something wrong
Hi David. If you look at Ed Gold again, you'll see that all the images have gone and I feel harassed, especially at WT:WikiProject_Military_history. Can you identify any problem around COPYVIO and if so help me get over it? Thanks. Also, do you have admin rights? I'm looking for someone to red-lock the page at, which I created yesterday as a redirect, in an experiment that I think will be a good solution for accounts that are accepted as being WP:BLP -linked. Ed gave me permission to do this and I'd like to propose the idea as a future general solution (obviously, after a similar process as Commons use for OTRS). Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not a Admin. Nick-D explained why the photos in question were removed from Ed Gold and has explained to you the process of clearing copyright at that Talk and on Nick-D's Talk. Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons have a long-standing and rigorous process for vetting copyright. For the Gold article, clear copyright for each image individually and add back. David notMD (talk) 12:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Personally, my opinion about your desire to put dozens and dozens of Gold's photos into Commons with the hope that other editors (or you) can then add them to articles verges on promotional. If you strongly believe that individual photos have merit for specific articles, then clear the copyright, put in Commons, and add to articles. Please tell Gold that this means anyone, anywhere, for any purpose, can take those photos from Commons and use for their own purposes, and will likely do so without crediting Gold. David notMD (talk) 12:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, he and I are clear on that. That's why I had some problem persuading him to release them under CC BY-SA 4.0. He has done so willingly because we are uploading only relatively low-resolution images that could not be used commercially and even if they were without crediting him he could sue and prove the master copies were his. I have not been adding the photos to articles other than Ed Gold and then only sparingly. Instead, I've been encouraging other editors to do so by adding comments at relevant project talk pages (military history and Australia so far). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It turns out (see military history talk page) that Ed and I did nothing wrong. Only the OTRS people can add their tag to images. While they have done so for the ones I uploaded first, they are behind with others, for obvious reasons. At least there is now some "customer clamour" to have this done. Thank for your interest. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:52, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please inform Mr. Gold that there are many websites which take content from Wikipedia, and often without credit. There are a few that even take draft content at Wikipedia - not yet reviewed and approved - and post it, basically front-running Wikipedia. Suing to stop any such use would be a fool's errand. Be aware that Wikipedia articles about photographers tend to NOT have multiple examples of their work. Fashion photographer examples: Richard Avedon, Helmut Newton, Francesco Scavullo, Herb Ritts, Gleb Derujinsky, Peter Lindbergh, Patrick Demarchelier, Steven Meisel, Mario Testino and Annie Leibovitz David notMD (talk) 14:06, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Good points for . He never suggested suing, that was my somewhat tongue-in-cheek idea: I don't think he's the sort to resort to the law courts as he has better things to do off-grid, I guess. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:19, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with Vitamin D
Hi David notMD, I notice you are somewhat expert, and a frequent contributor to Vitamin D. I recently posted on the talk page and was hoping for a response from you, on the right criteria to be used to assess content for inclusion in the article (specifically the growing understanding of the relationship between Vitamin D levels and COVID outcomes). Thanks.Tvaughan1 (talk) 23:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Can you help?
I am not prompted, or fed, or promoting. And the article is not self-promoting on the part of the subject, who is interesting neither in finding students nor anyone's money. Can you help me consider what to delete that may save the article? Per ColinFine, I've read and reread all guidelines. I know it is a tough article given slim resources, but i read that sometimes the ones I've found are acceptable. If I delete the majority of all of it... would that help? thank you Onganymede (talk) 23:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I could recommend deleting all of the quotations and the Interviews section and any hyperlinks in the article, but the key point is that ALL of the references are to content written by Gold, YouTube (not considered a source that conveys notability), an interview (same), or an organization started by Gold. Unless there are people not in any way affiliated with Gold who have published stuff about him, there is no potential for this article to survive the AfD process. You are welcome to leave a comment there, or even recommend Keep, with your reasons. In a week or so an Administrator will make a decision. Being a non-profit organization does not exempt from Wikipedia criteria. David notMD (talk) 00:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you much for taking the time to reply with these details. If I chop it way down, would you mind looking again and commenting? If yes, is this where I could prompt you? Onganymede (talk) 00:55, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If you respond here I will see it. A place to state that you do not have a conflict of interest (WP:COI) or are paid (WP:PAID) is on your own Talk page. The prime failure of the article is no independent refs establishing notability. Interviews do not count. If you cannot find refs not written by Gold, no amount of revision can save this. David notMD (talk) 01:19, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

D., per your suggestion I wrote on my talk page about COI and $. I found references, deleted much copy, restructured the rest. Would you look again? I have tried to eliminate partiality. Please tell me where it is still evident/problematic. Too much "spirituality"? I'll delete that section. Too wordy? I'll chop again. I hope it can be made "good enough" - with the new sources and the rest. Please inform... Also, you suggested deleting hyper links -- I read it was good to have, but will delete if better. Many thanks for your time and I hope this finds you well.Onganymede (talk) 03:48, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Articles should have Wikilinks, i.e., links in the text to other Wikipedia articles, but not hyperlinks to websites outside Wikipedia. Those should be managed as references. David notMD (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Better. I made a few changes, and at the deletion discussion left a comment that this could be converted to a draft, to allow for more work. David notMD (talk) 11:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

David notMD Oh,just saw this... Not sure how/where to keep up on all comments...keep finding and writing in different places/talk pages. Thank you for your assistance. I see it all now. So, I found and added nearly all new refs, but apparently not good enough. Dunno if I have any options left other than more deletions until just a skeleton. Sad but ok with me if we can just make it: Author, 4 books. Done... ? Onganymede (talk) 10:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Kaya toast article
Hi DavidnotMD, thank you for your help! I will be adding other references to replace Lee 2008. My tutor and I was going to go over the referencing problem next week but it seems you beat us to it. Thank you so much for your help. I will be more careful in the future. Pinklily08 (talk) 06:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

help with article about Harvard Bioengineer?
I see you are a member of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering Can you help me review a series of updates to the article about the Harvard bio-engineer David Edwards (engineer). I work for his company Sensory Cloud, which is developing a Covid hygiene prophylactic using aerosolized calcium fortified saline. Talk:David Edwards (engineer)#Request Edit Nov 5 2020 Thanks for your consideration. PC7956
 * Cleaned up a bit. One weakness is ref #2 (for academic career) is his own website. Another is the Fox news ref is a dead link. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Crown (Anatomy) Article
Hello David notMD, I was just wondering what you changed and fixed in the crown (anatomy article). Thanks alot Physiotherapist1234 (talk) 12:56, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * For any article, clicking on View history at the top menu shows chronological list of edits. (A number in green is bytes added. A number in red is bytes removed.) For each line, clicking on prev at left side shows what was added or removed. Clicking on the date in the line opens the article with the change incorporated. David notMD (talk) 18:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing up the references and editing the work. I appreciate the help :) Physiotherapist1234 (talk) 23:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, I was just wondering, what can I change to Gorham Disease in order to leave it in my article? Thank you very much Physiotherapist1234 (talk) 01:03, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If you want it back, put it back by going to View history and reverting my deletion. I will not delete it again. Still my opinion that a description of a very, very, rare disease is of no useful value in an anatomy article. David notMD (talk) 05:11, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I really do appreciate your opinions and your help. I was looking into it and thought it might give a good insight into the rare issues assocated with the crown. But, I still do thank you for your help :) Physiotherapist1234 (talk) 05:39, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Was my edit valid?
Piperlongumine Machinexa (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Machinexa (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In my opinion the article should be nominated at Articles for Deletion, as none of the referencing meets MEDRS. David notMD (talk) 18:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Alternative is to remove all those references and find references that are about the compound, with no mention of any putative health effects. David notMD (talk) 03:08, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Osteoporosis and Dairy
Hi! Nice to see your name pop up on my watch list. I hope that you are doing alright and managing to stay healthy. There are some suggested article improvements that you may be able to help with related to dairy and osteoporosis here. It looks like a few others are now helping as well, I just wanted to let you know in case you see additional problems. Take good care! JenOttawa (talk) 19:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I will look at the article and relevant Talk, but will not edit the article directly, as I have an old but relevant COI (I was working for National Dairy Council in the Research Dept back in the mid-80s, when NDC was funding a lot of the research). Other than that, healthy, waiting for vaccination, long-term Wikipedia project is to raise all vitamin articles to GA. Six done, seven to go. I dread tackling Vitamin D. David notMD (talk) 20:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for offering to look. I am glad that you are keeping well. Congrats on your progress so far on the vitamin articles!JenOttawa (talk) 01:59, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Thiamine
Could you please add and put reliable sources on oral bioavailability and elimination half-life (preferably oral, IM, IV) for Thiamine. I did some edits but could not find good sources. 08:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft of Amanda Brock
Hi DavidNotMD, thank you for your helpful edit on the draft page of Amanda Brock, I was just wondering what I can do to improve my chances of getting the page approved - i have followed yours and DDG's suggestions and was hoping if you could review again (if you get a chance). Many thanks Amurphy79 (talk) 10:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I move stuff around. Consider deleting the second paragraph of Career, as her roles in those companies do not appear to add to her notability. Wikipedia is not a CV. Ref #10 does not name her as past CEO of Trustable. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I have done that, I understand what you mean. Hopefully looking okay now? Amurphy79 (talk) 12:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The draft has serious reference problems. Refs #1 and #5 are interviews. Wikipedia allows interview information for support for factual statements, but does not count those as contributing to notability. Refs #2 and #3 are the her company website - again, not contributing. I do not see where #4 mentions her, and #6 and #7 are name-only mentions. #8 looks like a good ref. It mentions a book; if that was published in 2020 it can be in a section titled publications. #9 was written by Brock, hence not contributing to notability (need stuff about her, not by her). #9 does not mention her, and #10 is name-only. David notMD (talk) 12:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Noted, thank you, i have changed/removed some of these and added external references which are about her, not by her. Amurphy79 (talk) 14:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank You!
I appreciate your help on the draft for Dr. Roy S. Herbst. I've made some changes - I'm grateful for any feedback. Jcollinsycc (talk) 18:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Good afternoon - hoping to get some more feedback on my draft. I've made the edits suggested by you and others, and if there's anything else I can do to have it approved, I'd appreciate any info you can give. Thank you again! Jcollinsycc (talk) 18:29, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Good Article: Late onset congenital adrenal hyperplasia
I have nominated Late onset congenital adrenal hyperplasia for a Good Article and it got the status today. This is the first one I nominated. Just wanted to let you know. How nice! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 09:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I can see from view history the tremendous amount of work that went into preparing for the GA nomination. Thiamine is still on my 'look at' list after the Biotin GA review is completed. David notMD (talk) 11:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , I edited Biotin in June 2020, that is, gut bacteria synthesize biotin, but it is not reabsorbed in the colon, because it is in protein-bound form stored in intestinal bacteria, so it cannot meet the human biotin demand. I remember that in June you still wanted the page get the "Good Article", but it still did not receive this status :-( Maxim Masiutin (talk) 15:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

COI regarding my page- Tracksthegeneral
Hi! You recently commented on my question regarding Savanna Karmue. I have cleared things up now and hope that you understand. Thanks for the help! View my page to know more.

Tracksthegeneral (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

hello David please checkout this draft:Javid_Parsa
Hello David, hope you are doing good i saw your message on my talk page regarding previous draft of mine ; now i have improved my skills in wiki page creation and i had completed my another draft of an indian entrepreneur Draft:Javid Parsa he meet all the criteria's of notability as per wikipedia notability access please edit and make some possible improvements in the article if needed before the submission thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prakrutiprajapanti (talk • contribs) 09:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, it will be declined. There is a lot of non-neutral wording: "Staying adamant for his passion..." I looked as several references (Chinar trees, other) and all I saw were very brief mentions of Parsa by name. For refs, quality better than quantity. If a reviewer starts looking at refs and sees what I saw, that alone is grounds for Declined. Cut text, including all mentions of community and charitable. Cut refs by half. What will be left is a short article about his restaurant success. This may still be Declined on grounds of WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 10:05, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you please edit it as i mentioned i'm new here so please i request you make some possible edits to this draft thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prakrutiprajapanti (talk • contribs) 10:11, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

No. The focus of my edits at Wikipedia are to improve the quality of nutrition articles. That means there are millions of articles I have no desire to edit. I provided some guidance. The rest is up to you. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

In looking at your contributions, I see that you have been asking many editors to help you with your drafts. Please stop this. You have received some guidance at Wikipedia's Teahouse. Those Teahouse hosts have made commitments to aid new editors. If you intend to create articles, it is your responsibility to learn how to do it right rather than beg help from strangers. David notMD (talk) 10:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

WP:MEDRS
Hi David, thank you for pointing me to WP:MEDRS, and interesting and important read. What specific guideline from it are you relying on when you say single studies can;t be used? Kenosha Forever (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * From MEDRS: "Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content." That includes clinical trials (also animal studies). Secondary sources would be reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Given the often contradictory findings of individual clinical trials, secondary sources are strongly recommended. There can be exceptions, for example a very large, government-funded clinical trial, such as Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial. David notMD (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ah, interesting. I thought the opposite- that citing the actual study would be better than a 2nd hand report about it. So would this report on the study, from a secondary academic source be better, and good enough? - https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/02/zinc-vitamin-c-show-no-effect-covid-19-small-study Kenosha Forever (talk) 16:25, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Not really. A description of one clinical trial is no better than the journal article of the trial, and often worse, as a news outlet reporter may misinterpret or give undue weight to the results. David notMD (talk) 17:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * A search at PubMed on either Vitamin C and COVID or Zinc and COVID, limited to reviews, yields many journal articles, but I believe all of them are prospective in nature, i.e., given anti-inflammatory and immune functions of these nutrients, research ongoing and POTENTIALLY beneficial. See Vitamin D, article and Talk page, for heated debate on how to address evidence for COVID benefit. David notMD (talk) 17:39, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. 'often worse, as a news outlet reporter may misinterpret or give undue weight to the results'- is the exact reason why I thought the original article would be better. I guess the best thing is to wait for more studies. And also thank you for the comment on may page. Kenosha Forever (talk) 18:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Celliant
Hello, I saw your comment relating to the deletion of the "Celliant" page. Is this where I leave a note or can you please advise? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.63.217 (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * TYhis is my Talk page. The place to comment on the AfD for Celliant is at Articles for deletion/Celliant. David notMD (talk) 04:46, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey David notMD. The way you formatted your last comment at that AFD kinda makes it seem as if it was two separate comments made by two different editors, with the first one being unsigned. Not a big deal I guess since it's not a !VOTE, but it might be confusing to those not familiar with AFD or Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. I am not usually up that late. David notMD (talk) 12:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse exchange
Perhaps you can help resolve all this. Sometime after your Teahouse exchange, User:Hostagecat filed a complaint that I believe misrepresented me and has since resulted in a warning. I made an attempt to explain to User:EdJohnston the issue surrounding the entire dispute but it has amounted to anything.

I will try to give a brief summary: The source of our conflict on Operation: Doomsday was User:Hostagecat reverting my edit while falsely claiming that among other things, the text I wrote down did not have reliable sources. I replied on their talk page explaining the text did in fact have a citation at the very end of the sentence which they copy/pasted from. The citations were derived from sources that were already on the page and classified as reliable under WP:RSMUSIC. Instead of either accepting that fact or providing a clarification for what caused them to make such a false claim—perhaps there's some misunderstanding—which they based their entire revert on, User:Hostagecat instead opted to file a report. Understandably, User:EdJohnston had not been familiarized with the particularities of our conflict, accepted Hostagecat's claims without vetting if everything they said was accurate and gave me a warning. After I reached out to User:EdJohnston and tried summarizing what happened, they responded merely by citing a quote from me accompanied by suggestion that I should be willing to engage in discussion. I elaborated that they misunderstood my previous statement, and the larger scope of the reply they quoted from demonstrates I am willing to engage in discussion and was in fact engage in one that Hostagecat broke off from before trying to return to the topic of the user's false claims. When User:EdJohnston replied, for some reason they instead turned their attention towards the 3rr and my earlier speculation that User:Hostagecat potentially might have been a sock, even though I had already stated User:Hostagecat has clarified they are not and that I assume good faith and believe them. EdJohnston has since moved on to other tasks without touching on the specific issues that I presented and has yet to respond to my request for assistance.

I honestly don't know what to do here. It is as if every time I directly answer a concern that is raised, the subject is changed rather than discussed and resolved. I closed by saying, "Please indent in the reply" in my reply to Hostagecat for a reason. I honestly thought Hostagecat and I would continue our discussion and they could elaborate on whatever confusion they had over citations, what constitutes as a reliable source, etc. Instead they chose to completely break off without any further explanation and unilaterally file an obfuscating report which misrepresented me as being unreasonable and uncooperative and resulted in an undue warning when I was waiting on their reply. I really would appreciate it if you would take the time to help us resolve this. Please reach out if you have any questions.--Ascribe4 (talk) 14:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see where your coming from. Think I am starting to understand why other editors opted to keep their distance with this case. Still, perhaps I will will try User:ColinFine. Well, if you can, could you try to focus less on the album's content—which I do not really dwell too much on—and more on issues pertaining specifically to Wikipedia standards? i.e. Hostagecat erroneously claimed that the site music website AllMusic was unreliable when it is listed under reliable on WP:RSMUSIC, and that I did not cite any sources when the given citations were at the very end of the sentences which they copy/pasted from. Based on the limited discussion we've had, it appears as if Hostagecat was simply stringing together false claims pertaining to Wikipedia standards in addition to exaggerated concerns they now acknowledge were actually just minor errors and a simple fix (i.e. removing the hyphen in a given word), and presented them as alarming issues in order to justify a complete and total revert of my edit. The entire attempt appeared to have been motivated by the aforementioned grown attachment for the article and others related to it, the managerial role they seemed to have taken upon themselves, and an irritation that I didn't check in with them before making my edit. As if they were in charge of that page and I should have sought permission from them before doing anything. I wasn't even made aware of their presence until after they reverted my intial edit.


 * I can understand what is your (and I am guessing is also User:EdJohnston's), desire to avoid wading into this. But basically, the point of my contention is that User:Hostagecat based their revert and subsequently report that got me an undue warning on blatantly false claims relating to Wikipedia standards. If you can help initiate a resolution or point me to an editor whose purview this falls under, I would greatly appreciate it. --Ascribe4 (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Curatella
Hi,. I came across the article Curatella (syn. Curatella americana) during new page review, and in the hopes of expanding it out a little, I looked for it on Google Scholar. As it turns out, I found an unexpected plethora of technical sources – well beyond my lay understanding – describing this tree's medicinal properties, ranging from antioxidant to hypolipidemic to anti-ulcerogenic to antifungal to wound healing (in mice) to antimicrobial to cytotoxic to genotoxic.

For a lot of these, I feel unqualified to even just read the conclusions and use those to expand the article, for example: "In conclusion, our results showed that Curatella americana L. leaves reduce oxidative stress by free radical scavenging and protect against lipid peroxidation and is also able to manage hyperlipidemia by decreasing serum level of cholesterol and triglycerides, similarly to standard drugs." My takeaway from this paragraph as a layman is that these leaves have antioxidant properties and can help manage hyperlipidemia.

I was wondering if you know of anyone at WikiProject Medicine who might be interested in this. Given the amount of literature on this plant's medicinal properties alone, my naive guess is that this aspect's coverage can be expanded out significantly. Taking into account the overwhelming amount of literature I can find about the plant, medicinal or otherwise, I seriously believe this could be a GA or even an FA.  TheTechnician27  (Talk page)  17:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am going to start by saying "No," and then explain why. For all things medical, health, nutrition, dietary supplements, etc., Wikipedia requires that science meet standards of WP:MEDRS. Briefly, no test tube, no in vitro, no animal, and no individual human trials. The abstract your mentioned was about a combination of in vitro and animal research. WP:MEDRS calls for citations that are reviews of multiple human trials, systematic reviews (also human) and meta-analyses (ditto). A PubMed search on Curatella yielded 13 articles in peer-reviewed science journals, but no human trials. A search for ongoing human trials at www.clinicaltrials.gov yielded zero. Thus, somewhere between way too soon and never. David notMD (talk) 22:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * See Ginseng for a botanical with lots of research. Even with multiple clinical trials, reviews are not in consensus for any health benefits. David notMD (talk) 22:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. It makes good sense that we'd have that sort of stringent threshold. I don't venture to the medical side of Wikipedia very often because I'm usually unqualified to make any substantive changes, but it'll be good to read through WP:MEDRS for future reference.
 * Short of saying anything about humans, would it be alright to, say, indicate that there's been research in mice by citing e.g. this PLoS One article, or is that still going too far because it might imply medicinal properties in humans? If that's not allowed, I'm totally fine with that, as I can at least talk about the compounds present in the leaves while totally eschewing anything that could be construed as medical advice.  TheTechnician27  (Talk page)  22:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No. To the non-scientist reader, mentioning animal results would imply works for humans. And writing "antioxidant" would also imply a health benefit. The PLoS One abstract mentions catechins. While Catechin presents MEDRS-quality refs for vascular health, all that is for catechins from cocoa or green tea. Cannot assume that Curatella catechins are chemically the same, or that the extracts do not contain catechin-inhibiting ingredients. David notMD (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Quick note
Hi David notMD, just dropping a quick note to say I saw your suggestions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine, appreciate them, agree with your underlying attitude that we shouldn't be afraid to boldly remove protections, and will get to your suggestions asap. But right now I need to close my computer and get outside. It's a beautiful day here. Something about Vitamin D I'm told. Perhaps that'll be on your list eventually ;) I hope you're staying well! Ajpolino (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

KOKUMO
Either hand me control of my page or delete it. No one speaks for me. No one censors me. -KOKUMO, The Queen Of Queer Soul/Founder & CEO Of Born Worthy Records
 * Kokumo is at Articles for Deletion. It appears to be heading toward deletion. An Administrator will make a decision soon. Wikipedia has a policy that no one, ever, 'owns' an article. That includes articles about that person, so what you want is not possible. As an encyclopedia, it cannot be any other way. Wikipedia frowns on, but does not prohibit, autobiography (see WP:AUTO. However, if a person succeeds in creating an article about themselves, all (and I mean all) other editors would be able to make valid changes to the article. By 'valid' I mean that those changes would be need to be supported by reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Links to draft articles
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to List of lawsuits involving Donald Trump. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 13:52, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Understood. David notMD (talk) 16:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Gympie Pyramid
thanks David for your recent edit. Problem is that so many add stuff and even if you contribute a usable addition, if there was a BS edit before, it becomes messy. People have an interest those days in messing with the text, as there is a Gov construction site going through that site, and on the other side are claims by a native tribe, which are also not well respected my many. There was no interest in the previous short article for years, and it was bad with wrong links, now everybody edits like hell. Doug Weller edited after I uploaded and I will have to reset it to that version. everything else is not practical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikigetsme123 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Niacin flushing quantities by the method of administration
At Niacin you wrote that "More than 30 mg niacin consumed as a dietary supplement can cause skin flushing". However, in intermuscular administration, as low as 20 mg causes flushing, and in intervenous administration, as little as 10 mg injected in less than a minute causes fulushing for sure. But I didn't find sources on that except leaflets on Russian to the injectable solution. Do you have reliable sources on this to cite in English, preferable studies from Pubmed or trustworthy books? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 14:24, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Pubmed did not yield any literature on intramuscular niacin. A search on intravenous found a review of clinical trials (PMID 15673472). All doses were 100 mg or higher. The book I depend on most "Present Knowledge in Nutrition," had nothing on im or iv niacin. David notMD (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably, in the (PMID 15673472) 100 mg niacin was diluted with saline water for injection and infused slowly, by drops. This is just my guess. The quote is the following: "100 mg of IV niacin, and an additional 50–200 mg if necessary to ensure a flushing response of more than 15-minutes." The authors of this study did not try to prevent flushing. If I understood correctly, more flushing, more headache relief the authors achieved. So, they did not consider flushing as something undesirable. Although, they have admitted it as a side effect. At least now the Niacin article stated unambiguously that 30 mg to achieve flushing was related to "dietary supplement", i.e. the oral route. Should we probably improve the article in the future, we should be aware that IM and especially IV requires even smaller doses to cause flushing. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Vaccine-induced prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia
Hi again,. In the course of NPP, I came across the new article Vaccine-Induced Prothrombotic Immune Thrombocytopenia (which, yes, would have to be moved to 'Vaccine-induced prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia'). It does meet the GNG and is ostensibly perfectly fine – having been made by an experienced, respectable editor – and I would therefore normally mark an article like this as reviewed, but given this is about a current, worldwide medical issue and could easily inform the immediate medical decisions of thousands of readers, I wanted to run it by you before releasing it for index by search engines. While Science is clearly a reputable journal and the hematologists at the University of Greifswald who characterized this phenomenon are obviously experts in their field, I want to make sure what our article says comports with the level of current scientific consensus. I know you're a nutritional biochemist, not a hematologist, so I'm sorry if I'm pestering you over something outside of your wheelhouse, but given this has gone several hours without being reviewed, I just wanted to make sure an article with such massive potential to influence readers' medical decisions doesn't slip through the cracks. Cheers.  TheTechnician27  (Talk page)  00:42, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The article - still a stub - has been revised and re-referenced by an experienced editor whom I believe is a physician. I made a few more minor edits. In my opinion, this is a good start to what can be elaborated upon as more published results become available. The content being developed in this article might also be incorporated into the safety profile part of the article about the vaccine, as that gets far more visitations. David notMD (talk) 11:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Biological or elimination half-life of Vitamin B6
Do you have any data on biological or elimination half-life of Vitamin B6 that you could add to the article? It currently have no such information. Thank you in advance! By the way, a second article that I have nominated, 21-Hydroxylase has recently received the "Good Article" award. But the article on which you are working are much more complicated and controversal and important, thus harder to get the "GA". Maxim Masiutin (talk) 15:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I intend to actively work on vitamin B6 soon. Life has been busy (not with COVID). David notMD (talk) 18:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!
Hi David!

I just wanted to thank you for the small piece of advice you gave on my query in the Teahouse. My query has been archived, so couldn't respond there. It's really helpful to know that any bit of information I add to the site needs to be properly referenced, or I can expect swift and speedy edit reversions! I'll be happy to take in any other pearls of wisdom you may have, but just wanted to thank you for the gem you already shared - it really is appreciated! DizzyDaisies (talk) 19:28, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello David
I could use some advice and help. I have pasted here some communication to hopefully refresh your memory about your inquiry about my article.

Begin Paste:

TruthPR, a new editor was asked if there was a paid or COI situation with the SG article. Minutes later, stated is SG. Minutes after that, you initiated an indefinite block. The editor's editing aside, shouldn't there have been time to provide the standard warning to cease editing until declaring paid, rather than the block? David notMD (talk) 01:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: The indefinite block was the safest course of action here. The account claims to be Scott Gardenhour, which would require a block pending verification to prevent impersonation, additionally the username will need to be changed if the account is confirmed to Scott Gardenhour, it's also incumbent on the user to comply with our Terms of Use when starting to edit, we don't need to provide time for them to comply when they have begun to edit. The block is indefinite, not permanent, there's an unblock request and subject to confirmation via OTRS and a renaming to a username that isn't potentially deceptive to other editors, I'll unblock myself (and I'm happy for others to unblock when those issues are resolved). Nick (talk) 09:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC) Understood. I was just trying to see it from TruthPR's (Scott's?) perspective - a newbie trying to improve an existing article about himself, with the unintended consequence of the article now at AfD, and the block. David notMD (talk) 09:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

End Paste.

I reached out to Nick several times for clarifications on how to correct and comply to his requests but did not hear back. The article has now been deleted. I would appreciate any insights and guidance you have to get the article reinstated.

Thank you in advance,

SGBlackrockhwy66 (talk) 01:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * All above my paygrade (not an Admin). On your Talk page, unblocked, but then reblocked (?), you have a path to file an unblock request with answers to the statements in the block. Even you you succeed, still high barrier to seeing that article resurrected. Wikipedia frowns (but does not forbid) autobiography. You could ask the ruling admin for the deleted article back, as a draft to be worked on, but that may be refused as the deleted article being too flawed. Right now, a Wikipedia search on Scott Gardenhour redirects to The Institute (company), which averages around 10 views a day. You should not edit that directly. The problem with you leaving edit requests on the Talk page is that unlikely ever will be seen, to be acted on. David notMD (talk) 02:11, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Desigual Contribution
Dear David notMD, thank you very much for your contribution to Desigual article. I read your editor's page and was very happy to learn about your background because we both have a PhD degree that we got a long, long time ago and have worked for the industry. I haven't been with Wikipedia for that long, but I have been a freelance journalist and communicator for many years. I believe in making proffesionally the right to information of relevant companies and businesses compatible with Wikipedia's principles, avoiding promotional writing, which some companies have not yet understood. Together we can make a better Wikipedia. These days I am publishing in the most important Spanish newspaper two articles about Wikipedia, and I would love to send them to you, if we have a way to communicate by email or similar, I would be very grateful. Kind regards from a Spanish lady. --Ursulabela (talk) 15:11, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

If I may borrow your expertise
Greetings ,

so I guess our wiki-paths have crossed again. I planned to meddle in the Remilk draft, but it seems you have taken the initiative there which is nice. Seeing your latest comment there, may I ask you to review the section on Bovine_somatotropin? It contains the unreferenced quote "IGF-1 in milk is not denatured (inactivated) by pasteurization. The extent to which intact, active IGF-1 is absorbed through the human digestive tract remains uncertain." which I don't fully comprehend what it's supposed to say. Can you please check that the info there is accurate, and possibly reference or remove that sentence? Tbh, I find that whole section slightly confusing because it seems to mix concerns about IGF-1 with those about rBGH, without that being immediately clear to the average reader (like myself).

And completely unrelated... if you have some spare time, would you consider also taking a look at my draft (Draft:Polymateria)? I can still be patient, but I'd also love to just get some honest feedback on it. --LordPeterII (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This website https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/recombinant-bovine-growth-hormone.html states that BGH treatment increases IGF-1 in cow's milk (slightly), and that IGF-1 is not denatured by pasteurization. It also goes on to state that IF none is degraded in the human digestive system, AND all is absorbed, represents a very modest amount compared to what is produced endogenously. Unfortunately, not referenced. I will look at Polymaterial. David notMD (talk) 01:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response to my edits. I appreciate that you have seen that I tried to make these changes in good faith and not in any act of vandalism. I shall take your feed back seriously and cite as much as I can. I thank you for you letting me know of the rollbacks that occurred and I shall do my very best to resist the temptation to edit as much as possible. Take care. Caustic3 (talk) 15:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Tremendous effort, to no avail
Draft:Sewell_Peaslee_Wright

If I interpret correctly, your advice is to delete all the bibliography pages and, instead, edit the main page with a section labeled "Selected Works" that lists a few of Sewell Peaslee Wright's better known works, yes? Thank you. critical review is the first step along the pathway toward congratulations for a job well done sometime in the future 

Very good. I understand better. I appreciate your help and your time. ~Tchula65 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:242:500:C18:CD00:93CD:AF10:C363 (talk) 15:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

DRI article
Thoughts? Zefr (talk) 15:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC) Still mulling this one over. My involvement with nutrition dates back to my graduate school years at MIT (circa late 1970s, when the school still had a nutrition department). David notMD (talk) 12:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Advice for listing information that is factually true but cannot find "reliable sources"? Best I can find is no consensus.
I will try to be relatively brief, since I know you are a busy user and I have appreciated your help earlier today.

I have found some factual information regarding a tweet. The organization posted a tweet, deleted it, but it was screenshot. There are enough sources posted about it to where it should borderline be beyond doubt that it happened. Since I currently can only find multiple sources that are listed as "no consensus" (which by the admission of the Reliable Sources page is NOT a standard to outright ban a source). I realize one must be careful in using a "no consensus" source, but one CAN use one. So I am at a loss as to what I should do.

It is inappropriate to outright remove a source on only the basis that is not listed as a reliable source, so what should I do if something factual occurred but can only, at best, find it on "no consensus" sources. It is important that all pertinent information is listed for a page. I respectfully understand that partisan sources creates undue weight but when they are the only sources to list something that actually happened, what can I do to respect Wikipedia but have Wikipedia respect my right to post sources on things that happened?

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Updatewithfacts (talk) 01:13, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia requires verification, and it establishes criteria for defining reliable sources. No editors have a 'right' to post. There are channels for discussing what is a reliable source. The first stage is to try to reach a consensus on the Talk page of the article, inviting the other editor via ping. This has not been done. Beyond that, Dispute resolution describes additional steps that can be taken. David notMD (talk) 02:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I respect your opinion and also your advice on how to deal with this situation (and I intend to invite the other editor) but let us be intellectually honest and considerate to each other. Editor DO in fact have a right and choice to post. Wikipedia editors DO have the right to review and decide if it should stay up or not. There is no violent action being done against me or legally preventing me from posting. So I DO, in fact, have a right to be allowed to post (I do no have the right to have it stay up: big difference). If you wish me to be humble and understanding of the situation and follow the rules of Wikipedia, we must be considerate. I pointed out that I do have a right to at least attempt to post things to Wikipedia. I hope you will acknowledge that. Wikipedia should be about diversity and that means allowing different researchers and editors to post and allow all kinds of information on a topic to be posted. But I do respect your willingness to help me figure out what to do. I will attempt to invite the other editor. I have had difficulty doing that in the past but I promise to make an attempt and I hope to reach a consensus. I also wish to point out that I have reached out to the editor on his talk page. While that is not inviting to the Talk page of the article, it is reaching out to the editor. Thank you again for taking the time to read this. Updatewithfacts (talk) 02:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

This definitely predates my existence
I honestly can’t remember where or when but some time ago you made reference to the “NotMD” part of your account username and made a comments implying only very senior editors understood the “NotMD” part of your username. Do you mind letting me on this? I’ve been dying to know this. Celestina007 (talk) 22:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was answering a query about my name not too long ago. Before Wikipedia existed, I was on several forums. At one, there was a "David MD" who was quite opinionated. I decided I would be David notMD, there and later at Wikipedia, equally opinionated. As you can see on my User page, I am "Doctor" but not "medical doctor", so David notMD is correct. David notMD (talk) 01:13, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Very much regaling. I thought as much! Celestina007 (talk) 09:12, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

B12 injections
Anna Nicole Smith allegedly had abscesses on her buttocks from B12 injections. Jerzy Kosiński mentions B12 injections in a novel. Could you add a section to Vitamin B12, about the myths and facts of B12 injections? .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Valid suggestion. I am prepping Vitamin B6 for a GA review, but will revisit B12 and consider how to approach that. Back in the 1960s, an infamous doctor nicknamed "Dr. Feelgood" was injecting celebrities (and President Kennedy) with vitamin mixtures that contained B12, but also contained amphetamine!!! David notMD (talk) 01:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Additional Substantial Information for Inclusion in the article on C. Farris Bryant
Hi David,

I have added additional text and added references to my earlier sandbox work on Farris Bryant. Thank you for reviewing my previous work.Attu43 (talk) 22:16, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dora Apel has been accepted
 Dora Apel, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Dora_Apel help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:12, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Town Hall caption at Maynard, Mass page
Greetings, User David, not MD. Good catch. Thanks. I trusted someone who knew better would correct the caption if wrong.

First, where are they held then?

Second, can you come up with a more informative caption than one that simply repeats what is emblazoned on the building portrayed in the image? You seem positioned to have some insight.

Third, sorry, could not simply "Thank" you at the History page. Unregistered users are denied the privilege. Sadly, there is no other way.

Keep up the good work. Yours, 2601:196:181:BE00:E4AD:4E98:A14D:A302 (talk) 22:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The largest room in the town building can hold maybe 60 people. Town meetings are held in the gymnasium of the middle school, usually drawing 200-300, but approaches 1,000 for contentious votes.

Hi!
Hello David notMD! Thanks for telling me about the shaded box in my edits. Because of your help, I now have over 100 edits! Anyway, what does it mean when the shaded box is left for quotation? Sparklestern (talk) 10:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Answered on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 11:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Clarifications about my Draft: Jalaledin Moayerian
Thanks for your attention and here is some clarifications about my draft as Jalaledin Moayerian;

1- I don't have any objection about the taken decision and I just need your help to know what would be the best way to publish this article in Wikipedia. As you know the reason of rejection was submitting multiple drafts and not the article by itself as per Robert McClenon.

2- Since it was my first article so, I didn't know anything about the rules, procedures, tools... of Wikipedia and I asked many people i.e. friends, other family members and colleagues to help me out. I even asked Robert to help me on April 23 at 15:59 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&diff=prev&oldid=1019483422) but no reply at that time. Maybe the other editor, user:No Judgment, is one of the people whom I had asked for help. Is it acceptable if I leave a comment on the talk page of user:No Judgment to keep going and I provide the feed for this article and or ask this user to stop working on this article? (I am just asking you for the advice and don't want to make it worse)

3- Since it was my first draft so, I didn't have any experience and didn't know I should have declared the subject is my uncle. If I wanted to hide this matter I would not submit the draft under my real name. In fact, I submitted it under my real name for the purpose of transparency and to show my honesty because I didn't see any reason to hide my identity and was thinking I would be considered as a simple user. Having said that it was unintentional if I didn't mention the subject is my uncle and it was just because of lack of experience and knowledge.

4-Referring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jalaledin_Moayerian, per provided comment by the reviewer, Robert McClenon 07:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC),the reviewer has not decided that the topic is not notable and I had been advised to blow up and start over my draft. In addition, Referring 16:55:28, 31 July 2021 review of submission by Aria Moayerian, I have been advised by User:Timtrent to start over (here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#16%3A55%3A28%2C_31_July_2021_review_of_submission_by_Aria_Moayerian). As the final question, I am just wondering if I still have the chance to start over.

Thanks a lot for your patience and your anticipated consideration is highly appreciated. Aria Moayerian (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Jalaledin Moayerian - The New Version Hello David, First of all I would like to thank you for your kind attention and very useful explanations how to create the new version of the draft: Jalaledin Moayerian. FYI, I created the new one and implemented your advices. Below please find the draft and if you think it is looking good for submission, please let me know how I could submit it for review (I couldn't find the option for submission). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jalaledin_Moayerian#Awards%5B2%5D%5B3%5D%5B11%5D Best regards, Aria Moayerian (talk) 22:06, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Numbers and Photo replacement Thanks for your advices. I applied your comments about fixing the numbers (sources dates) and the photo. May I ask to have a quick review again before the submission. Your anticipated patience is highly appreciated.

Appreciation Many thanks to you David for your help, advice and support. Yours Truely!Aria Moayerian (talk) 14:21, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Help
How to appeal that block help me to appeal it and please don't block this ip and how I can appeal what i have to write please can you publish that draft I will give you draft link so you reveiw it and publish
 * I have no interest whatsoever in advising you on how to appeal the block, or on any of the topics you appear to be interested in editing/creating. Asking me (or any other editor) to work on your proposed draft is forbidden block evasion. David notMD (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Jalaledin Moayerian
Hi David, I just would like to thank you for your all help and advices related to my article as: Jalaledin Moayerian. This article is created and I am just wondering if I should do anything else and what would be the next step. FYI, I just google the name and it didn't bring up the article so, may I ask the reason. Thanks a lot! Aria Moayerian (talk) 18:08, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

May I ask your thought about replacing “caused effective movement in…” with “is referred the evolution in…” Aria Moayerian (talk) 18:21, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Your wording is much better. Thanks a lot. Aria Moayerian (talk) 21:06, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi David, referring your other hint about the phrase “teaches academic makeup…”, I am just thinking to change it to: “The institute’s grads are some of the most successful and sought-after professionals in the entire Makeup Design artistry. May I ask your advice? Your kind attention is appreciated as always. Thanks Aria Moayerian (talk) 16:24, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * A statement like that would need to be referenced. (I have no idea what the references state.) The current wording is "...and teaches academic makeup to the young generations." As I see it, what you are trying to convey is that he is the founder and also serves as a teacher. I suggest "...and teaches makeup skills to the students." If the article was about the Institute, then it would be useful to have evidence that the school has a good reputation in the industry, but as it is about Jalaledin, sufficient to convey that he is the founder and a teacher. David notMD (talk) 02:07, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks David for your kind advice. I will amend the phrase as yours. Yours truly. Aria Moayerian (talk) 02:23, 7 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi David, Sorry for taking your time again. There is one more award that could add the value to this article but I need your advice because of the following matter. Just FYI, this award is important because it was the very first award of Makeup artistry in the history of Iranian film and TV and no one had received Makeup artistry award prior Jalal. The issue is that Jalal received this award in 1975 (before the revolution in Iran) and unfortunately there is not any related magazine, newspaper ... available now (after 46 years) and also there is nothing in internet to be referenced. The only evidences that I could collect is the photo of the Trophy along with related letter of commendation (I asked my cousin to take a photo of that and send it to me) and a screen shot of the related ceremony (taken of a documentary show about Jalal showed in TV few months ago. The question is that how to provide the reference if I want to add this award to the article. Below please find the photos and the documentary show links;

Once again I would like to thank you for your kind attention in advance and this article would not be published in Wikipedia without your help. Aria Moayerian (talk) 15:52, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Golden_Jam-e-Jam.jpg
 * https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/جلال_الدین_معیریان.jpg
 * https://fa.ifilmtv.ir/Program/Content/9570 (part:36 - min:28 sec:33)
 * good question, and a not entirely simple answer. The documentary itself can be a reference. See Template:Cite AV media. That means that the 1975 receiving the award can be described in text of the article as long as that information is in the documentary. Cannot use the screenshot, as that is copyright protected. To use the photo, you will need to go to Wikipedia Commons and add the photo there, saying that it is your own work. See Contributing your own work. Step #4 has Upload Wizard link. Once it is at Commons, you can add it to the article. For example, I contributed four of the gallery photos at Lake Wallenpaupack. David notMD (talk) 16:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Did you know topicons broken
Hey! I was looking at your userpage and I noticed that your Did You Know? topicons appear to be broken, showing the text with a broken image symbol to the left of it. Not sure if this is just on my end or if it's actually messed up. Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 19:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Nevermind it appeared to just be a one time thing. Sorry to bother you! Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 19:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Space 220 Restaurant
So if we got rid of all the things that sounded like an advertisement why can’t we get rid of the thing that says it’s written like an advertisement at the beginning of the page? Kaleeb18 (talk) 16:40, 9 October 2021 (UTC)


 * What I wonder is why this is a separate article – there is an article about Mission: Space (which contains a bunch of details that should be pruned), and since this restaurant is evidently part of "Mission: Space", it would make sense to have it as a section in that article. I can't see that it is independently notable, and there is not much encyclopedic detail there. --bonadea contributions talk 17:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You, as the creator of the article, and a new-to-Wikipedia editor, should not be making that decision. However, of greater concern now is the quality of the references. David notMD (talk) 21:23, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Can I reference the Google page when you type in Space 220 as a reference for the rating or can you not do that cause it's Google? Kaleeb18 (talk) 13:17, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Not Google reviews, and also not Yelp. Content at those sites is by anyone who wants to contribute, so Wikipedia does not consider those as reliable source references. Same applies to using a Wikipedia article as a reference. Ditto IMBd for actors and Find-A-Grave for information on dead people. A rating would have to be from a well-known restaurant reviewer, published in a well-known publication. David notMD (talk) 13:24, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Charles Williams
Thanks for feedback. some assistant secretaries added more detail (medals, ribblons etc) after they were listed on wikipedia. read all of them, talked to most of them and used similar references but apparently submissions are not qualifying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flagship1 (talk • contribs) 03:11, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Until you learn how to incorporate inline references that are properly formatted, this effort is futile. I created an example at your Talk page. I suggest you practice in your Sandbox, then only when satisfied with ref formatting, copy content into the draft. David notMD (talk) 09:39, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

David, you mind taking a look at draft:charles williams again. incorporated your recommendations.Flagship1 (talk) 14:13, 20 October 2021 (UTC) flagship1

My staff worked on this, made changes and thought it to be acceptable. Removed most of the references and cited the remainder. Do you think it is ready for publication?

Flagship1 (talk) 19:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Advice appreciated
Hello David notMD, Thank you for reviewing my draft in August: Draft:Victor Ross (businessman). Your positive comment on notability was very reassuring ("I think the person qualifies as notable......Good luck. David notMD12:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC,)" as is your Hemingway TeaHouse quote - so I persevered, sorted the "refs mess" and removed some "wanderings," read the articles you advised, and resubmitted. However the draft has just been declined again on grounds of lack of notability (and 'tone' -so I have now rewritten in a more neutral tone,and removed two'peacock' terms.)

I am struggling with the latest decision on notability, especially as you thought it qualified in this area. From my UK perspective, a half-page Obituary published by The Times (London) is just not possible unless the recipient is of standing and note. VR had a high profile in Britain as Chairman of Reader's Digest (Europe;) and for his public charitable work with The Association of Jewish Refugees(AJR) and British Academy. He is a published author, reviewer and broadcaster (BBC.) He and his family are also closely associated with Sigmund Freud (VR donated his mother's substantial correspondence with Anna Freud to The Freud Museum.)I think the refs and citations you pointed out do now all work correctly and back up VR's profile sufficiently.

I really appreciate everyone's help and their different criteria and interests, and will happily learn from the advice of experienced editors, but as a newbie it is confusing to have shifting sands around 'notability;' I thought I was on solid ground there! Could you advise on how to proceed? Would you have time to have another look? Much apprecieated. RondDeJambeRondDeJambe (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Draft:Victor Ross (businessman) still contains content that is true and referenced, yet does not contribute to his notability, nor, perhaps, not of interest to the general reader. For example, "He was also a collector and connoisseur of books and autographs." in the Lede, and "During a long career in publishing, he had the opportunity to meet many influential leaders and politicians, and became a keen collector of Presidential and Prime Ministerial signatures.[10] He acquired a substantial library with an emphasis on both political works and the arts." in the body of the draft. What qualifies his notability- his RD career, being an author of several books, or the charity work? Expand. Ref #11 does mention Ross at all, but #12 does, and can be used more. David notMD (talk) 16:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Mandraketennis (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Mandraketennis has been indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 10:57, 16 November 2021 (UTC)