User talk:Harry53

Atropa belladonna
Hi, as you may know, this article is currently the subject of quite a bit of controversy, and is even within the scope of an Arbitration Committee case: Requests for arbitration/Homeopathy. This allows uninvolved administrators to place discretionary restrictions on the article, and/or the editors who are working on it. I do admit that I have some concerns about your recent comment at the talkpage, which was a bit uncivil. In the future, please try to keep your comments in a more professional tone, thanks. As for your specific concern, about citations that were removed, you are welcome to re-add them; however, I would ask you to avoid simply doing a blanket revert, but instead to try and change the article towards a compromise version to address concerns. Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions, --Elonka 22:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

This is the last straw for me and Wikipedia. A year or so ago, I ran into an illiterate aromachemical industry shill on the perfume article who consistently modified everything positive about naturals so that he could put forward the aromachemical industry spin that synthetics are better (there is a LOT of money involved in that debate on their side). Nothing whatsoever was done about that, and last I looked, that fellow had chopped that entry into a million illiterate bits dominated by industry spin. Now I see that someone else with an agenda that doesn't even have anything to do with the subject--which is belladonna--has made a career of vandalizing this entry so he can put his "scientific" ideas forward. I know a lot about belladonna. I have personally grown it for years. I sell the seeds and the herb. I've researched its medical and folkloric uses and written about them on the web. At one time, this entry even sported a link to my belladonna page, although I did not put it there and have no idea who did. It was there because my page is an informative page. I very much doubt that the fellow who is doing this vandalizing can say he has got the same level of knowledge about this plant that I do. But he and the other "skeptics" are going to have the last word on this entry, because I do not have the time to keep coming back here and cleaning up the hork they have spewed all over it in order to put forward their ideological stance. And just to be clear: I DON'T EVEN BELIEVE IN HOMEOPATHY. However, I do recognize the arrogance and intolerance that characterizes those who deem themselves "skeptics," people who cannot ever allow any perspective but their own to be put forward. I will not be adding anything more to Wikipedia at any point in the future.Harry53 (talk) 15:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)