User talk:Hipal/Archive 48

Talk:Tariq Nasheed
Why are you now removing information with sources from talk pages that meet BLP criteria? If you think it isn't, please point out why your position is the correct one, not simply remove it and leave an unpleasant message on user talk. - HKEY LOCAL MACHINE\Security (talk) 07:46, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize that you found the message I left you unpleasant. I'm happy to refactor it to your liking. I struck it all out and started again. Let me know what else I can do.
 * BLP states: Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion
 * From my perspective, you aren't making proposals for improving the article in any way, and you are not using reliable sources suitable for a BLP article.
 * BLP states: To ensure that material about living people is written neutrally to a high standard, and based on high-quality reliable sources, the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material.
 * I've been assuming you are an experienced editor that knows that Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages. I may have been wrong in that assumption. --Ronz (talk) 13:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Ramdev Article
Hi Ronz,

I just added new organizations that he has founded. Please tell what seems to be promotional in it. 103.219.213.50 (talk) 05:16, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

There are n no. of articles who even dont have any references and are still alive. Wikipedia people are biased. See this one and give one reason why it exists - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishwas_Mudagal


 * I had already started a discsion at Talk:Ramdev. As I said, mention of the organizations may be worth noting. Promoting them or giving undue weight is not appropriate. For example, I don't think mention of corporate inaugurals are appropriate. --Ronz (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Removing information
I understand that you believe that Famousbirthdays.com is not a reliable source, and I can't argue. I do object to your removing the information, which I'm confident is accurate, instead of finding a better source. It took me about 30 seconds to find two additional sources, one of which is the horse's mouth, that verify the information. Rks13 (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for resolving that. --Ronz (talk) 15:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Except a google search is not a reliable source. --Ronz (talk) 15:39, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Says who? Rks13 (talk) 16:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:BLP places the burden on those seeking inclusion. The Google search result lists sources that we both agree are unreliable. I don't know how anyone is going to make a convincing case that the result is reliable.
 * See WP:GNUM and WP:DOB.
 * I've been looking for sources to use, but am coming up empty. Sorry. --Ronz (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Reg. Harsh Beniwal Page
Hi Ronz,

I've added reliable sources such as HuffingtonPost, India.com, DailyO, PunjabKesari etc. That guy Harsh Beniwal has more than 580k subs on his Youtube channel, 1.2m followers on Instagram, 1.3m likes on Facebook. His channel has more than 40m views and 250m views on Facebook. Now, I've added reliable sources as well. You still think HuffingtonPost and India.com are not reliable sources ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjk5678 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. I had already started a discussion on the article talk page. Let's keep the discussion in one place so others can more easily participate. --Ronz (talk) 17:59, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

HRVY
Hi Ronz

Thanks for Helping Me, BUT Please May You answer this Quick Question about HRVY that I created, which is

1. WHY isn't My Article I made Recently which is the R&B singer and TV Presenter coming up on the Main page, when you or Someone clicks the Google search engine and Click HRVY and it Doesn't show it on Wikipedia when you press Wikipedia to it or Not, It Still doesn't come up with it Straight away, rather than go into Wikipedia and Press these Letters HRVY and it goes into It?

Can You answer it for Me Please, I Don't Get It At All?

Thank you for your Kind Response

Kind Regards

James Duggins
 * I don't know why it should show up, or why you'd expect it to. --Ronz (talk) 19:48, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

The Oreo Cat Wiki page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Oreo_Cat

Thanks Ronz! Your comment was the most helpful out of all of them. I understand now!ModugnoT (talk) 11:59, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Removal of contribution to Toll Free Telephone numbers
Hi Ronz,

I am a retired employee of Deutsche Telekom in Germany and worked on freephone Service im Germany from 1982 untill I retired in 2012. My last position was Head of Produktmanagement for freephone service. I participated on the definition of the interbational Service with CEPT, ITU-T and ETSI and chaired the International Inbound Service Forum for 5 years. May I know why did you undo to my changes?

Best regards Gerhard Krohn87.165.105.156 (talk) 21:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Gerhard. The article certainly could use the help of an editor with your background. However, not much progress can be made without reliable sources to verify the information in it. The information you added did not include a source, and the mention of iis-forum.com seemed more of a promotional bit at the end, given I doubt it would be considered a reliable source for any expansion or verification. --Ronz (talk) 23:19, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ronz,

Thanks for your response. You mentioned that you need reliable resources to verify the information provided.

My contribution had two parts "International toll free Service" and "Germany". Im am not sure how to provide the Information / sources required.

Most of the work on International Freephone Service was done in CEPT and ITU-T working groups and subcommittees. And the International Inbound Services Forum provided contributions to this bodies by papers presented by members of the organization. This papers were not published or included in reports. The only result is the final recommendation of the iTU-T

In this case the ITU-T Rec. E.152 " International Freephone Service" in various versions (with reflects the developments in the market (e.g. introduction of UIFN).

The Part on Germany shows the history of the freephone Service in Germany. As a time period of 30+ years is covered it is difficult to make references to one source. However there are three publications (all in German only) who cover certain periods.

1. Der Fernmeldeingenieur (Zeitschrift für Ausbildung und Fortbildung) ISSN 0015 - 010x from 1986 Heft 8 und Heft 9 on "Service 130" Verlag für Wissenschaft und Leben Georg Heidecke Bad Windsheim

2. Neue Dienste im intelligenten Telefonnetz von Wilhelm Krusch from 1993 (Editorial cooperation by myself) R.v.Decker´s Verlag ISBN 3-7685-1492-7

3. Artikel in NET Hüthig GmbH Heidelberg Heft 5 / 6 195 on Konzept und Dienste des Intelligenten Netzes (Teil 1 und Teil 2) from myself

best regard

Gerhard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.165.105.156 (talk) 12:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Let's discuss this on the article talk page, so others can help.
 * My other concern about the removed content was the level of detail. It seemed too detailed and too technical at times. --Ronz (talk) 15:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks again Ronz for the info you left in regards to my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Oreo_Cat I did not realize that this was a thing. I did my best to rewrite the article, but if it does not get accepted I will understand why. Again, you've been a great help. Thanks for taking the time to share all the info.ModugnoT (talk) 23:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

FuzzyCatPotato ANI
I'm notifying you because you interacted with him at EL/N and thought you might have an opinion to add. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages)Have a blessed day. 01:37, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Liens établis
August 2017 Information icon Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to List of Playboy Playmates of 2017. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 23:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Merci de votre remarque. Je pensais avoir sauvegarder les pages de lien. Bonne journée — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breizhbird (talk • contribs) 09:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

I am unsure as to why my edit was reversed on David L. Jones' page.
Your change summary said that it was an advert sourced only by Dave's youtube page. All the things I posted there were from the about section on his youtube pages. Is that just not enough, do I need to find sources other than that? His primary youtube channel was used as a source in other places. I am new to Wikipedia, and I am not entirely sure on most of that stuff. TwoOfFive (talk) 22:06, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. Yes, what we need are better sources.
 * Simply, if there are no independent sources, there's no way to determine encyclopedic value and proper weight.
 * Basically, you've written something suitable for a press release. Wikipedia is not a venue for such advertising. Dave's article has a long history of such edits from what I assume are his fans and forum members.
 * Finally, the article falls under Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons, which requires that content about living persons must strictly meet Wikipedia's content policies. --Ronz (talk) 22:26, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

About Milroy Goes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milroy_Goes

I have added media references and sources. Please rewrite if needed. But keep a check on the citations as mentioned now. Its valid one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrizz (talk • contribs) 20:00, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a great improvement. Thanks. There's a long way to go still. --Ronz (talk) 00:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Michelle Joy Phelps
Hi Ronz,

I have created a Wiki page for and on behalf of Michelle Joy Phelps and have been notified about some issues with the content that needs resolving. Please could you elaborate so I can get the page up to meet your guidelines.

Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by El único (talk • contribs) 14:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for contacting me about this. I'll respond on your talk page to make it easier for others to find it and join in. --Ronz (talk) 15:02, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding COI
Hi Ronz - I saw your message yesterday regarding conflict of Interest. I think i made some edit where I provided Intellipaat website links as well as some external links also.

The purpose for the edits to share the knowledge and help the community instead of any promotions or advertisement for the company I work also I hardly think the users coming to wiki can be my website customers as its a free source of information whereas we are selling courses.

I would love to contribute to wiki in future as well and let me know apart from intellipaat is there any other you see so that i will understand the whole issue in better manner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chittora (talk • contribs) 13:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Is Genesis History? Cast
For a feature film, the use of IMDB, cross-referenced with the film site, cross-referenced with Amazon is proof this is the cast. That is the only way to verify, in fact, short of watching the film and taking notes at the credits. I bought the DVD and they are on it, just as those three sources say. What's your problem with that? Boeldieu (talk) 02:16, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia. The article falls under general sanctions, which requires very strict adherence to all relevant policies. I advise that new editors avoid such articles. Sorry to bring this up, but it's extremely important. Working on such articles is very difficult for everyone.
 * Thank you for your response on the article's talk page. As you see there, I already have stated that I think a simple cast list should be fine. --Ronz (talk) 16:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Dennis Prager Wikipedia
Hi Ronz,

There are several dishonest, misleading and slanderous statements on Dennis Prager's wiki page. My edits were to remove the information that was not factually accurate. Many of the statements made go against Wikipedia's "neutral point of view" policy and thus should be removed.

James
 * If you could explain why, based upon Wikipedia's content policies, it would be of great help. Please do so on the article's talk page. --Ronz (talk) 20:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

The NPR article sourced is clearly a biased hit-piece with false and defamatory information about Mr. Prager. This source does not fit your need for "independent" sources. Also, the dishonest and inaccurate information on LGBT rights sourced from New York Times should be removed. Mr. Prager has never suggested that same-sex marriage will lead to polygamy or incest. This statement should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jameshastings (talk • contribs) 19:24, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Edits to Dennis Prager
Hello, I believe some of the edits you made to Dennis Prager's page are misleading. Can you please change the wording so it is more neutral? Thanks. 79.73.252.247 (talk) 18:10, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but if you could review WP:NPOV and give some specific suggestions, then I might be able to help.
 * The problems I've been seeing are:
 * Editors who agree with criticisms of Prager want to embellish the article with quotes that the editors themselves have chosen.
 * Editors who support Prager want to remove content without regard to the quality of the sources, the presentation, and the relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines.
 * As I've written on the article talk page: We're not here to promote Prager's viewpoints, nor create a venue to oppose his viewpoints. --Ronz (talk) 18:32, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Michelle_Joy_Phelps: 'article has multiple issues'.
Hi Ronz, I am new to Wiki as you can see and trying to get a bio up to Wiki standard. I am working on behalf of the person in question 'Michelle Joy Phelps'.

Look forward to your reply.

BR

Issues:

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. (August 2017) This biography of a living person includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. (August 2017) This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (August 2017) This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. (August 2017) — Preceding unsigned comment added by El único (talk • contribs) 08:40, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not following up with you previously. I'll respond on your talk page and add the article to my watch list. --Ronz (talk) 15:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Futility Closet and List of Futility Closet Podcast episodes
It seems to me that both the captioned articles should be deleted. The problem is that the main article has recently survived the deletion process. However, I think we are now in the position of having new evidence, not least the multiple spamming inserts in some 20 or 30 articles (I did not count them). Furthermore, reading the text you deleted out of Futility Closet, one has to develop a strong sense that this included some information on sourcing that is untrue; at the very least it is economical with the truth. For instance, the deleted text goes into some detail on where they source their information - but there is no mention of Wikipedia at all.

I think it is also relevant that List of Futility Closet Podcast episodes demonstrates that every podcast has a link to a Wikipedia article. This suggests to me that the podcast uses Wikipedia as a source of ideas (not prohibited, but it calls into question their claims about sourcing). Listening to a selection of their podcasts, with the associated Wikipedia article open, there seems to be a significant commonality of structure between the two. There is simple plagiarim of Great Tea Race of 1866 - it's not obvious early in the podcast, but later on there is direct reading from the text of the Wikipedia article. This all amounts to a lack of notability that is surely significant to a deletion discussion - and I doubt that any of this was known to any who looked at the original deletion proposal.

The previous deletion discussion was very brief, with only two users opposing it. One of these, unsurprisingly, was User:Lantzy. I don't know if it is appropriate to mention it, but the blog appears to be run by two people. I wonder what their Wikipedia user names are.

I deleted most (hopefully all) of the spamming additions to various articles yesterday. Not being an expert on Wikipedia protocols, I don't know if this was appropriate, but I was working on the principle that actions speak louder than words. What actions do you feel should be followed now? ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 07:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The deletion discussion was a bunch of hand-waving. No sources were offered to support anything.
 * I find it best to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on avoiding making assumptions about editors' intents and identities without very strong evidence.
 * I'm not familiar with the lengths that copyright violations are investigated. I'm sure there's an appropriate policy talk page that you could use, if not a noticeboard, but it's not clear to me where to start in a situation like this. Maybe just ask for some direction at Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations.
 * While I hoped that there would be more discussion, the deletions might be a bit aggressive so soon, which is why I only made a few. Lantzy has had a chance to respond, but has chosen to edit elsewhere.
 * Now, I'd wait and see if there will be further response. --Ronz (talk) 15:37, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, good advice. On the copyright, I've read the procedures for someone infringing Wikipedia copyright but now cannot find them (or remember them well enough - there is some standard e-mail to send warning them and asking them to attribute, I think) so I'll ask where you suggest. Noticed something strange about Lantzy's user page whilst spinning out a few minutes before getting back to work - the list of articles created does not seem to match the edit history of any of the articles. No idea what to read into that. Anyway, wait and see, combined with researching copyright seems the best course of action. Thanks, ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * On copyright, I have been pointed at Wikipedia_talk:Copyrights, which seems helpful. It has links to the boilerplate e-mails, etc and a real life example.[User:ThoughtIdRetired|ThoughtIdRetired]] (talk) 22:34, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

External link MBTI
Hello,

I think you did a mistake by deleting the external MBTI link I added to the MBTI wiki page.

This link is totally related to the subject and is not commercial.

Sincerely,

Dragovski — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragovski (talk • contribs) 19:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for contacting me. I suggest you discuss the matter on the article's talk page and see if you can get anyone to agree. Before you do, I strongly suggest you review WP:EL, WP:COI, and WP:COPYVIO. --Ronz (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

The external link on MBTI wiki
Edit : I have just seen that you answered, I will try to find the talk place on the page.

Dragovski — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragovski (talk • contribs) 22:18, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Relation between photographic illustrations and the Wikipedia articles
Hi Ronz

Regarding your comments to me at "User talk: Yachef," yes, "Yachefman" was an earlier user name prior to my shortening it to "Yachef."

Regarding the relationship between photographs from Wikimedia Commons and the articles themselves which I have edited, I have read through the section on your user page about adding images to Wikipedia articles.

I can understand where you're coming from when you made comments in your editing of the articles I've worked on. I can see how the questioning of some of the photographic illustrations could lead to your general conclusions. I would be happy to discuss it with you. Yachef (talk) 05:52, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for responding. It would be better to discussion the matter in general on your talk page so others can find it easier. If there's a specific article you want to discussion, then better on that article's talk page. I'd appreciate a ping --Ronz (talk) 14:55, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Lorne Michaels
Thanks for straightening that mess out. PaulCHebert (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I hope so, but we'll see where the responses take us. A WP:COIN discussion may be overdue. --Ronz (talk) 19:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)



Dave Barry
Your comments, please on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dave_Barry#First_wife. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 20:52, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Responded there. It's probably accurate, but I'm not finding any reliable sources for it. --Ronz (talk) 22:07, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Your edit on Lauder
Those were nice edits on Lauder you did the other day. There is much public information about the chairman's personal life available which is currently not covered in the Wikipedia article, though it is very well know due to its large press coverage. It should only be done properly by an experienced editor and maybe you could consider doing it properly before it is done improperly by someone else. This is a reasonable source and you'll see what I am referring to:. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManKnowsInfinity (talk • contribs) 18:42, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It was just some basic cleanup.
 * I agree that he's the type of person that gets a large amount of press coverage, for various reasons. The article could certainly be improved.
 * From what I can make of myfamilylaw.com, it's a group forum and blog. I don't see how it could meet Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources in general, much less the stricter requirements for biographical information. --Ronz (talk) 19:17, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This is the well known Forbes article from 2010 which covers this material more thoroughly: . It also appeared on huffington.post, and many newspapers though the Forbes is quite well written. If you don't feel the material is significant enough for the article, then I'll try to rethink its contents since it would be easy for other editors with less experience to express this type of material very poorly for the purposes of Wikipedia. Cheers. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Luckily those less experienced editors have to meet the criteria for BLP as we all do: If it's poorly sourced, it gets removed.
 * Thanks for the Forbes article. It's a bit gossipy, but could probably be used to a limited extent without much problem. My recommendation is to make a list of potential references of quality similar or better than Forbes, and see if we can get others to work from them. The Forbes article makes comparisons to other well known people who've been through similar situations. Perhaps there's coverage and discussion in the Wikipedia articles for those people that we can follow. --Ronz (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * In addition to the Forbes article above, these would be the other two main reliable source articles for this topic: NYPost here;, and The Daily News here; . Some added comments on William Lauder as part of the larger Lauder family at Town and Country magazine here: . ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Forbes article. It's a bit gossipy, but could probably be used to a limited extent without much problem. My recommendation is to make a list of potential references of quality similar or better than Forbes, and see if we can get others to work from them. The Forbes article makes comparisons to other well known people who've been through similar situations. Perhaps there's coverage and discussion in the Wikipedia articles for those people that we can follow. --Ronz (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * In addition to the Forbes article above, these would be the other two main reliable source articles for this topic: NYPost here;, and The Daily News here; . Some added comments on William Lauder as part of the larger Lauder family at Town and Country magazine here: . ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia article creation
I've started a discussion at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard.

I suggest you follow Requested articles, following Conflict_of_interest in order to avoid any problems with your conflict of interest. --Ronz (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Anatoly Shariy
You placed an "advert" tag on the page. IMO it is a bit unfair. This person is quite notorious in Ukraine and Russia. For this reason it is extremely difficult to find really neutral sources about him. In Ukrainian official media he is thoroughly hated. As a result he is loved by "patriotic" Russia and hated by Russian opposition. Everywhere else nobody cares. Still, he is of note, having over million subscribers and billions of views. I don't see particularly promotional language in the page. At the same time I don't particularly care to write a decent article; searching really neutral sources will take quite some time. If you object to some specific language, please indicate; I will fix it. (Disclaimer: in a way I am not neutral for this topic: I dislike modern Ukrainian regime, which glorifies former Nazi collaborators and murderers of Polish population in WWII, therefore I am inclined to side with its critics.) Staszek Lem (talk) 17:31, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * All those YouTube links look like advertising. --Ronz (talk) 17:34, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * He is a videobloger. Youtube links are used as refs to youtube stats and for personal info. I see nothing promotional in them, rather they are primary sources from the article subject, But they are allowed for neutral personal info. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe I've made a mistake, but it looks to me that the YouTube links are being used as primary sources for otherwise unsourced information, and added to promote the individual videos where there are sources. --Ronz (talk) 18:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes' like I said, wikipedia allows primary sources in bios for personal info. As for promotion, he has several thousand videos and most of them are over half-mil views usually accumulated in 2-3 days, so I guess views come mostly from subscribers. (I am not a subscriber, but I do watch him because of his comedy value. Sometimes I am tempted to use his videos as a ref for news elsewhere, but his overly and profusely ironic style of presentation does not make it a good encyclopedic source.) Also, most of them do not have lasting value, "heat of the day", so to say, so there is nothing "promotable" beyond his channel itself. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

FYI: re:13:51 (cur | prev). . (-215)‎ . . Ronz (talk | contribs) (per SOAP, BLP) -- (uncontested edit) Actually this is one most respected thing he is doing: he collects donations and then passes money to elderly people in the separatist Donbass region, where government stopped paying social security despite the fact all their life they worked for the country. The videos tell histories of ordinary elderly people who are no way separatists, but got caught victims amid political ambitions. At the same time I do agree this needs independent ref. I think I will spend some time to find such re, because, as I say, this is one thing Shariy deserves respect. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Let me know if I can help. --Ronz (talk) 00:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Batteroo
Revert war. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep. I've already requested protection and started a discussion on the article talk page. --Ronz (talk) 17:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * And I filed AN3RR. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:15, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Famousbirthdays
Hello

I saw a little while ago a source was removed from an article I was writing as famousbirthdays.com is not reliable – thank you first for this insight! I know famousbirthdays.com emails many of the people in its articles for their information, but I particularly know Jessica's birthday to be correct as she tweeted out on that day: https://twitter.com/jessbuttafuoco/status/714901688092659713

what would you recommend for to do – cite the tweet? Your help would be really appreciated.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by L.Mastroddi (talk • contribs) 11:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Tanks for contacting me. It's better than nothing, and shouldn't be contested as long as no other sources question the information. See WP:BLPSELFPUB. --Ronz (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Ann Louise Gittleman - Conflict
Hi Ron,

I have stumbled upon a defaming bio and for some reason, everyone seems content to leave it as such. I have reached out to admin and haven't really found a resolution.

There's not enough info about the lady online to get sources beyond the basic and those that are published by her.

The best play is to probably delete her bio altogether. But, as a greenhorn, I don't know enough to get any real traction.

I'm proposing a more balanced view of her, right now, the tone is very biased and not neutral at all.

Seth Godin
Hi, I felt like the edits I made to the Seth Godin article were in a completely neutral tone (except maybe for the removal of the BLP sources tag, which I see now should probably remain) so kindly explain how this can be done in a more favourable manner (apart from the replacement of the primary sources). Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 17:38, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It looks like you understand my concerns:
 * You're editing a BLP under a coi.
 * The sourcing of the BLP is rather poor, and much of the content promotional.
 * Your single, large edit is difficult to review.
 * Thanks for the smaller, subsequent edits and the improvements that you made with them.
 * I'll review it in more detail later. --Ronz (talk) 21:09, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I looked at your first small edit . That's a rather blatant COI violation from my perspective, and I consider myself less conservative than many other editors that work on COIN disputes. Haven't you run into problems with such edits before? Have you been asked to work from change proposals before? I think you should at this point. --Ronz (talk) 22:24, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * As genuine business ventures of the subject I didn't see much of a problem adding that information to the section, without going into detail about the costs, contents, etc. of the two programs (which would then be blatant SOAP in my opinion). Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 04:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's take it to COIN then. --Ronz (talk) 14:56, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Will Weinbach Player Page
Ronz,

I did not create a page for advertising, publicity, or other purposes as you listed in your talk to me. I created a neutral facts-based page because I am a writer, MFA, by trade who created a bio for Will Weinbach because one did not exist and he is a nationally ranked high school tennis player that has gained notoriety, especially in my state, for interviewing A-list athletes at the age of 16. There is no reason not to publish this page. Not doing so is purely vindictive, as the article I wrote has no self-promotion and speaks only of facts of his business ventures and athletic accomplishments.

If you think it is not neutral, and facts-based, you have all the requisite links to verify the information. Not to mention, I even included his only tournament results, a loss in his first match. I also included his ranking information, including his 1-star (lowest) prospect rating.

No information was glossed over. Nothing negative was held back. I literally adhered to all the rules.

Don't punish this young kid by keeping his life from the world. He's done stuff people should know about. More importantly, your site, wikipedia, is dedicated to the consolidation of information. I took approximately 4-5 webpages worth of pure information and consolidated into one article for wikipedia. Literally, the point of your site.

Not publishing this article is a slap in the face to what your site stands for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCGimpy (talk • contribs) 17:56, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to let you know that editing with a conflict of interest requires great care.
 * As for the draft article you're working on, it would be best to find more and better sources before putting it up for review. Articles for creation should guide you through the process, and I'm happy to help if you like. --Ronz (talk) 20:51, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Yukon and Nunavut company registers undone
Hey Ronz,

Just wondering why the Yukon and Nunavut company registers are set to TBD on the page List_of_company_registers?

They definitely are both free to search which is why I set them to yes and provided a link as proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben25890 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I've restored the info minus the links . --Ronz (talk) 22:07, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

BLP added for my contributions on page Pradeep Chowbey
Dear Ronz, As my contribution name suggests this is the first article where I have made contributions. I took it up as my learning to add and see how I can make my contributions legitimate. I in fact had a long trail of conversations with the Editors while trying to add Picture of Pradeep Chowbey. As i had someone very close treated by him and saw an opportunity to start with his profile to learn the process, it might still have given the impression of conflict of interest. I have made no attempt at glorifying him nor i have added anything which is not genuine. I intend to contribute more to his profile and take this as an opportunity to interact more with mentors like you to understand this challenging and interesting concept of wikipedia ahead.

Infact you can guide me as I find that the information in this article is very haphazard. I wish to create a better version of the same with proper subtitiles.

Thanks Myfirsts
 * Thanks for responding.
 * Just to let you know, but your editing makes it look like you could be . From what you've said above it's just a coincidence.
 * Editing a biography of living persons can be very difficult work. Given the subject matter, the poor sources overall, and the controversies over the safety of bypass surgeries; I want to minimize my involvement in the article. I can help you find others that might be able to assist you. --Ronz (talk) 15:21, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Tigerspike Wikipedia Page
Hi Ronz,

I understand Tigerspike has to comply with various policies on Wikipedia but it would appreciated if edits were not all of a sudden removed.

Tigerspike as a company has undergone some changes recently, and we would like that to be reflected on our Wikipedia page. It took quite a long time to ensure all the information about Tigerspike was put on Wikipedia in a coherent fashion and now the changes made by you cannot be reversed.

We have removed some promotional links, if there are any more specifically which need to be removed, please show us which ones they are instead of reverting back to our old and now out of date Wiki page.

Many Thanks, Tigerspike Next (talk) 16:11, 18 October 2017 (UTC)The Next Team


 * Hi, I watch this page, and note that Ronz's changes to the page in question are fine. In fact I stopped reading after I read this bit "Their process focuses on blending technology with human expertise to deliver business value, fast. Their five underlying values: Transparency, Resilience, Problem-Solving, Energy and Curiosity, encompass what it means to work at the company." promotional guff like that does not belong here. -Roxy the dog. bark 16:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Tigerspike Next,

Thanks for contacting me. I've already started a discussion on the article talk page here. I'm suggesting you make edit requests for the article so that everything will be properly reviewed. All the information you added is still available in the article history. --Ronz (talk) 16:52, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Jena Rose wikipedia
Hi, I'm trying to get the Jena Rose Wikipedia page completed, but I'm having trouble figuring out how to remove the error messages from the page (notability, citations, and conflict of interest - there isn't one). Can you provide insight on how to do this? Nobody has reviewed the page despite there being a message on the talk page saying you submitted to WikiProject: Musicians, but nothing has come from this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmvCS (talk • contribs) 14:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I started a discussion about these concerns already at Talk:Jena_Rose.
 * I strongly suggest you take some time to get far more familiar with Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines if you're going to continue to work on biographies.
 * Are you declaring your conflict of interest appropriately per WP:DISCLOSE? --Ronz (talk) 17:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Edit to "Know Nothing"
Hi,

I was wondering as to under which guidelines my edit is classified as vandalism. I changed a link from a redirect to the page itself. I am a little confused, as I could not find anything that classified this as vandalism.

Thanks, Cran32 (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That's not what you did, and you aren't making a case for restoring the edit, so let's not waste time on categorization. "Practical joke" might be more descriptive, but however it's categorized, it's not appropriate. --Ronz (talk) 15:53, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Um, what? Cran32 (talk) 16:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ACK! I'm really, really sorry. I have the John Oliver "Drumpf" Chrome add on installed on my computer, and it must have changed it when I pressed Show Preview. I swear I would never intentionally vandalized. Huge apologies, Cran32 (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That explains it. I was wondering if somehow you didn't realize what had happened. Thanks for figuring it out. --Ronz (talk) 16:52, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Dead link
The link was working when I changed it from the dead one you prefer. I'm not a spammer, as anyone with any sense could tell almost instantly from an examination of my long contribution history and status as an administrator. DrKay (talk) 19:44, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that.
 * Any idea what the site was before it disappeared? --Ronz (talk) 19:53, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I found one other link to it. I'm not seeing any spamming or cleanup of spam. Whatever it was, it's rather strange. Maybe a good faith attempt to create an archive by someone that didn't realize the resources needed?
 * Sorry again for the edit summary. --Ronz (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have amended my own comments. The link is archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20170923151607/http://www.datasheets.tips/technology-and-applied-sciences/background-information-and-justification-for-reintroducing-the-maple-tapping-access-program-act-as-part-of-the-new-federal-stimulus-package/. DrKay (talk) 19:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Good catch. I don't know why I couldn't find it searching archive.org myself. Obviously there's much more in archive.org than I'd been able to find.
 * Added to their site in May, so no short-term dead link strategy.
 * No meta info on where it's from, nor copyright info.
 * No ads, just links to other documents they'd copied.
 * It looks like the inclusion in Wikipedia triggered the archive.org archiving.
 * Still looks like copyright problems is why they're gone...
 * Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * That may be the only archived article. The main page and the first page of each category are there. Not much to work from at this point. --Ronz (talk) 17:10, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Cameron Moulene
Hi, thank you for your note, I appreciate your help. Is there any other problem with any links or anything more I could add to the page? Thanks. Gabi.labuschagne (talk) 08:44, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't have the time to review all the references when I removed the few. I'm not sure when I'll have time to look over them all, but will try. --Ronz (talk) 14:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Ethnicelebs
Ok, it's fine. If you are sure that is not a reliable source then I've no obiections. Sorry for the mistake Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 17:29, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

hi
in regards to this edit.... this Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine was posted and came across which is why it was added to 'see also' of article in question...--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I saw the comment. I didn't understand then and still don't. --Ronz (talk) 17:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Suggested Article - Harmless Harvest
Hi - I work with Harmless Harvest, and I've added the brand to the suggested articles page (since it would be a conflict of interest to draft it myself). I saw that you edited the coconut water page and thought you might be interested in drafting the Harmless Harvest page - please let me know what you think!
 * Sorry for the delay in responding. Use Articles for creation, and be sure to have sources that meet Notability (organizations and companies) criteria. Let me know when it's ready for review and I'll take a look at it for you. --Ronz (talk) 02:06, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Dialogues External Links
Hi Ron,

Thank you for leaving a message regarding the link(s) removal. We are unclear on why external links to a person's interview page are considered inappropriate. Isn't it similar to linking to IMDB profile for their film credits? Or is it because Dialogues is aggregating interviews as well?

We have no malicious intent and are only looking to increase the value of any given profile by providing additional perspective and background.

Thanks for your time.
 * Thanks for following up with me. Briefly:
 * Please review WP:COI.
 * Interviews in general tend to be poor sources of information.
 * A link to a list of interviews is simply too general.
 * I was also concerned about copyright violations. --Ronz (talk) 02:00, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Cayenne
I completely agree: that stuff totally isn't reliable, but I thought I'd leave at least some of the old sources other editors have been using, I've already got rid of quite a few links. I plan to add info on cultivars and more references now, and then get rid of the last alternative name 'red pepper' (as it is unsourced and rather like saying an alternative name for a football is a 'round ball') Leo 86.83.56.115 (talk) 04:06, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep up the good work. Let me know if I can help further. --Ronz (talk) 16:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Your comments to Russellbesq
Hello. I got your message. I am confused about what you think I did. The only thing I can think of is that I provided links to some resources that happen to be located at my firm's website. However, those resources have been relied upon by the Obama Administration, The Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and many others. I did not cite to anything that is promotional. I have discussed this in the past with editors, and thought it was resolved. Please let me know. Thank you, and sorry that this is creating an issue. RB — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.252.37.120 (talk) 16:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)  Sorry - this was from Russellbesq

I should note too that the materials are all academic-type materials. (I actually use them in a class I teach on the subject.)
 * Thanks for the quick response. I'm responding on your talk page given the need for others to be involved. --Ronz (talk) 17:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Worth getting involved again?
Have all the usual suspects that made WP a grind all those years ago still around and being pandered to by their admins? Shot info (talk) 07:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Shot info. Good to hear from you. I don't know if I can give a very useful answer. I try to ignore the drama, and don't know how widespread it is. Tribalism is certainly alive and well. "Good editors" is too often used as a screen of protection. COI has a long way to go yet. BullRangifer seems to be much more involved in major content disputes. Maybe he would have a better answer. --Ronz (talk) 16:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * On the positive side, FRINGE and MEDRS are being followed more closely, so it's much easier to resolve those types of disputes. --Ronz (talk) 23:29, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Nice. That's something positive at least.  Yeah, it's been a while since I bothered here :-) Good to see you still active though. Shot info (talk) 06:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I hope you will find a way to return that suits you. --Ronz (talk) 15:15, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

I dont like this
I dont like this how u thinknthat famous birthdays is not reliable why huh its very reliable millions stars are on there and it was my first search result and if u have a better idea tell me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WidgetFan1234 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I responded on your talk page, with a source that you should use. --Ronz (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Dispute resolution
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! (on behalf of User:Mnnlaxer) --Dirk Beetstra T  C 06:53, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Hey, Ronz
I know it was partially an automated message, but I was considering taking your advice about moving to a different (non-fringe, non-sanctioned) area to contribute. I was wondering if U guys have a list of stuff that needs to be done, that maybe I could pick thru? It seems like it would be more effective than having to go out and look for things.

Also, I know U probably don't have time for this, but I was wondering if I could arbitrarily make U a kind of mentor, if I continue here? I would try not to abuse U. I have already followed many of the links that u suggested and would try to get most of my info on my own. But, as I don't know anyone here, it would be nice just to be able to ask a question once in a while (like is there a spell check on here?)(jking, I can see now that there is.) Thanks --Psylocyber (talk) 09:55, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Feel free to ask me questions, but I don't have the time to mentor. WP:ADOPT can help you find a mentor.
 * User:SuggestBot can be used to get editing suggestions. Wikiprojects are also a good way to find articles to work on with editors interested in the same topic areas.
 * I hope this helps. --Ronz (talk) 15:34, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
If I didnt mention it earlier, thank you for your words of welcome and introductory information last year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipediaisgreat (talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Following up
Hi Ronz, I apologize if I don't need to follow up here and on the other page, but I do want to make sure that you see that I am not ignoring your issue. So, please let me know if I should continue to write here as well as there - or just here. Thanks. RBRussellbesq (talk) 13:31, 26 November 2017 (UTC)russellbesq
 * Thanks for the reminder. Your page would be best. --Ronz (talk) 16:19, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Jan David Winitz Page
Hi Ronz, I left a message on the Jan David Winitz talk page Talk:Jan_D._Winitz on October 11th about reviewing a citation to be added to the page. Have you had a chance to review this? There are a few other references that I think would add value to the page as well. Could you review the below content and additional references as well? Lastly, since you revised the text and citations on the page can the tags be removed from the page now? Thank you for your help with this,Rug Connoisseur (talk) 22:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC) Page content with added citations for review: Winitz was born in 1955, New York City, the younger of two sons. His father, Dr. Milton Winitz, was a biochemist who worked for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). After graduating from high school in Palo Alto, CA, in 1973, he enrolled at the University of California (Berkeley). He obtained a Bachelor of Arts double degree in English and German language and literature in 1977 and a master's degree in Education in 1978, from the same school. Upon graduation, he became a high school English and German teacher at Sonoma Valley High School, Sonoma, CA. While teaching, he met his future wife, Christine, and together they pursued their mutual interest in antique Oriental rugs, buying and selling carpets privately. In 1980, Winitz abandoned his teaching career, creating Claremont Rug Company with Christine at its present location, and became president of the company, a title he continues to hold. Starting with an initial inventory of 40 rugs,[1] Winitz developed a following in Northern California as a keynote speaker at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco in 1985. By the late-1980s, Winitz built the Claremont inventory to nearly 700 rugs, obtained in private transactions, employing a network of buyer/collectors who sought rugs globally. Currently, its inventory has grown to 3500 antique Persian and tribal rugs.


 * Sorry about that. I responded to what is on the talk page. If you're requesting further changes, please do so on the talk page.--Ronz (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

the famous people as a source
Hi, I am still surprised I added this reference as a source, as I also would not consider it a reliable one. Thank you for noticing! I'll pay better attention in the future. Best, Laura — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljdowning (talk • contribs) 08:22, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Spammer
Hi, Ronz. I noticed you rolled back most of the spammer 's edits. Thank you. I was just wondering, do you have Writ Keeper's mass rollback script? Use with caution, like he says, but for a case like this, it's marvellously convenient. One click! (I have just used it for the few you had left.) Bishonen &#124; talk 17:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC).
 * No. Thanks for letting me know about it. I seriously need to tool up. --Ronz (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Uploading the pictures
Hi Ronz,

Thank you for getting to me, I was actually trying to upload some pictures, but couldn't. They are pictures of diffusers as I was editing the article about aroma lamps. The pics of devices i wanted to upload didnt have any mark or trade sign.

[User:Valeryia2017|Valeryia2017]] (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Famousbirthdays.com as a source
Hi. I am not familiar with the site or how they obtain the information available on the site. therefore I can't give an objective opinion on the matter. --MR.HJH (talk) 21:37, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. I'm not clear if you want to discuss it further. I have looked into it a bit and they seem to take user-submitted profiles and edit them to fit their format and style. The quality of the writing and content of their articles is extremely wide, suggesting they do very little. I believe that it's use as a source has been discussed at RSN a few other times besides the discussion that I linked for you, as well as in deletion discussions or the like. I've yet to find any favorable discussions for it. --Ronz (talk) 22:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

 * Thanks. I'll look into it a bit more. Arguing for independent sourcing isn't as difficult as it once was. --Ronz (talk) 18:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Cinema online
Hi Ronz. Further to your note on 's talk, what is your opinion about cinema.com.my as a source? Dr.  K.  03:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You had to ask... I started looking at the sources and balked. Let me take a look... --Ronz (talk) 03:39, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Even the best of such movie sites are poor sources, and this doesn't look to be one of the best. I can't find any obvious discussions about its reliability in the few hundred uses in Wikipedia. Probably not reliable. I wouldn't use it. --Ronz (talk) 03:47, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for looking into that cinema source. I agree. To me, it looks even worse than IMDB. I will remove it. Btw, I just removed a ton of wordpress fluff. Dr.   K.  03:50, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Yoga
Another one of your anti-quack campaigns, ?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 10:30, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know how that description could apply. I spotted some very complicated edits that were hard to make sense of, and did my best to put some light on them. --Ronz (talk) 16:43, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Gino D'Acampo Date of Birth
I will try and locate a more reliable source. Rusty1111 : Talk 18:30, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Birthday source
I'll remember to find more reliable sources next time. Firezzasd (talk) 00:51, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 01:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

You reverted my citing
hello Ronz I am new here so i might be wrong but i think that if i provide citation for a piece of text which needs citation, and whats in the text is the same info provided on the cite i provide and at times even deeper reasonig and logics then what part i am doing wrong that you have to revert them? Regards Para90


 * Hi Para90. Thanks for following up with me about this. The citations you have supplied are not reliable, and one was clearly not a citation at all. They've also been spammed by a number of ip's during the same time period. Please don't add them back, or any similar links. If you disagree, we can discuss it more, or we can get some assistance from others if you prefer. --Ronz (talk) 02:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

hello Ronz
I do not do much with wikipedia, so I thank you for your response. I think you made a response a couple of days ago about Max Gerson (and a case that turned out poorly) but I cant seem to find it now. Your response seemed to indicate you were at least rational about this subject, so I thought I would try to appeal to you regarding being fair on this subject.

Right off the bat, most people with a stage 4 or stage 5 cancer are going to die. So, for somebody at that stage to go on a holistic diet (Gerson or somebody else) and to die is not a fair "sample". Is there a potential upside to the Gerson diet? Absolutely. I know of a person who is living more than three years after being given 12 months to live because of nutrition. He had a 2% chance of living today had he gone the conventional way. Doctors are astounded, but they also don't WANT to HEAR HIS STORY! You see the problem is that none of these success stories ever get off the ground. I know people who have been threatened for trying to get their story out. This is NOT heresy, it is first hand information. Another friend of mine went on a Reams diet about ten years ago. she had breast cancer. The doctors said that she had a 90% chance of living with chemo, and likely a masectomy, but she chose to go on a holistic diet (Reams method) and eliminated it completely. She has been cancer free without the downside of having to take chemo. By the way, this is not rocket science. What is so hard to believe that a certain intake of food, liquid and supplements can flush out cancer cells? WE generate new cells every day? this is basic science.

One of the problems with holistic diets is that you must make a lifelong change of eating habits. This is very difficult. Because what brings the cancer on to begin with, will often bring it back (unless you change the environment). so, yeah, maybe 97% of the people who go on a Gerson diet die and many of them because they do not have the discipline to stay on the diet. It is hard work.. for a lifetime. But those same 97% die the conventional way also. The few percent that make it (and STAY on a diet) might live while those going the conventional way usually die because it comes back.

I can tell you of other stories.

The big problem is those at wikipedia have simply given into the medical establishment mindset because they are "authority". This is just wrong. They have a vested interest. This is not to say they are bad people. It says that everybody that goes thru medical school will be indoctrinated with the mindset that nutrition is quackery. It is somewhat akin to living in the south during civil war times. How do you think most people in the South thought of slavery. Mindsets are extremely powerful.

All I ask is that you give this a fair shake. Personally, I think you have it backwards; you call the Gerson diet dangerous? taking chemo or radiation when there might be cures otherwise is dangerous.

But a compromise is that at least leave it so that "the jury is still out" There is certainly evidence to suggest that you cannot say with any kind of certainty that holistic is any more dangerous than conventional. Max Gerson was a genius. What about what he did for Albert Schwietzer? How can that be overlooked? Or are you going to say that was made up?

Please keep an open mind. One of your loved ones might have his/her life saved someday because of it.

thanks for listening.

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoodKingJohn (talk • contribs) 13:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * While I don't want to be dismissive of your experiences and beliefs, we're here to build an encyclopedia. "Serious and respected encyclopedias and reference works are generally expected to provide overviews of scientific topics that are in line with respected scientific thought. Wikipedia aspires to be such a respected work."
 * In my opinion, an "open mind" is a start, not an end.
 * "The big problem is those at wikipedia have simply given into the medical establishment mindset because they are "authority". This is just wrong.  They have a vested interest.  This is not to say they are bad people.  It says that everybody that goes thru medical school will be indoctrinated with the mindset that nutrition is quackery." I hope you have an open mind to other possibilities. Take a look at WP:MEDRS and evidence-based medicine. --Ronz (talk) 16:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Heja2017mexicomexican
Apologies - I was already pulling the trigger on this one and overwrote your final warning. Kuru  (talk)  02:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for the help. --Ronz (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Butkusmi
My name is Mike Butkus, in the days of 8 character login names I created butkusmi   six character of the last name, first two letters of the first name.

You want me to use MButkus ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butkusmi (talk • contribs) 02:53, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You're username should be fine. I'm responding on your talk page to make sure others don't make the same mistake that I did regarding your username vs the link you have been adding. --Ronz (talk) 04:14, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Foam Pits Source Deletion
Hi Ronz,

I noticed that you'd recently made edits on a page of mine. I'm very keen to get this page live, but as far as sources go, there isn't much on the subject. As such, I'd like to request your assistance in finding sources which you feel are appropriate.

Many thanks Derrick — Preceding unsigned comment added by DerrickDiggler (talk • contribs) 09:14, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I was hoping you would discuss how you will manage your conflict of interest first. --Ronz (talk) 16:54, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Request.
HI Ronz, I need to ask you what type of source you want to know.Please listen to lecture of Shri Rajiv Dixit Ji .There he has said everything you need to know.Even in R D wiki page D P agrawal is seen with R D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BK knowing (talk • contribs) 15:11, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Reliable, third party sources with historical context are ideal. --Ronz (talk) 16:55, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest - corydigital.com
Hi Ronz,

You left me a message about me being a conflict of interest on an article about content writing. I was just linking to a blog that is online about a topic relevant to that blog post to expand the knowledge of the user. I notice that you do not have pages or articles about On-Page SEO or Off-Page or Technical SEO. For that matter an up to date one. So me posting a very up to date article about the topic that the people who would be visiting that page would be interested in doesn't seem a conflict of interest.

I believe that this is a mistake and I am messaging for you to please re-post that link. I am also in the middle of writing content for Wikipedia to have set pages for On-Page SEO and the other factors of SEO for your selves. This was just the start of my journey.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Best wishes, Cory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corybeevers (talk • contribs) 16:33, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for following up with me. Responding on your talk page. --Ronz (talk) 16:54, 18 December 2017 (UTC)