User talk:Kodasnap

C3 Foundation
By the way what is your relationship to this group per WP:COI? Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 18:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Kodasnap response

I have no relationship to nor conflict of interest with this group. I do have knowledge of The Sinclair Method and its efficacy and am aware that the C3 Foundation advocates for its usage. It is very interesting that you should choose to immediately move to discussion of conflict of interest. What is your conflict of interest in not having the C3 Foundation featured on Wikipedia?

You have not addressed the fact that the C3 Foundation and C3 Foundation Europe are registered charities in the US and in the UK and subsequently are subject to stringent legal requirements in both jurisdictions. You have also not addressed why you consider Alcoholics Anonymous, Moderation Management and SMART Recovery to be reliable sources despite them also being registered charities.

I have also taken the time to research your credentials. Given that you claim to be an Associate Professor at the University of British Columbia, it is peculiar that a search for staff members at that institution produces no results for James Heilman.

Quoting from The University of British Columbia website: "Sorry, but no matches were found. Refine your search by changing the parameters in the form and/or search within all campuses. You may start over, review our Help Section. If you still need help, call UBC Directory Services at 604.822.2211 for further assistance."

I wonder should I call them to inform them of a potential fault on their system so that they can further investigate?

Also, when searching for doctors called James Heilman, I do admit I found one, based in Seattle, but the last time I checked Seattle was close to but not actually in Canada, where you claim to be based and the photo of that Doctor James Heilman doesn't resemble the "James Heilman" in your photo. (I found a second; in Cincinnati, in the USA, not Canada). Again, I wonder should I inform Wikipedia so that they can investigate a potential issue in the coding of their website as it appears not to be rendering images properly?

Also, and I am casting no personal aspersions upon you other than to say that there is something which jars strongly with a person on the one hand claiming to be a qualified physician and an associate professor on the one hand and stating they have problems with grammar on the other. Generally doctors and professors have an extremely acutely developed understanding of grammar as do the vast majority of those working in academia.

As a courtesy:
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- &mdash;Javert2113 (Siarad.&#124;&#164;) 19:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I was in the process of saying: You were not ignored, you were told here that just because some inappropriate sources might exist here does not mean more can be added. See WP:OSE as well. As this is a volunteer project with tens(if not hundreds) of thousands of medical related articles, it is possible for inappropriate sources to exist, even for years. This cannot justify adding more inappropriate sources. They can only be removed if detected by volunteer editors like yourself or Doc James. It isn't always possible to do this all at once and have that be the end of it- it is a continuous effort that doesn't really end. 331dot (talk) 20:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for contravening Wikipedia's harassment policy. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I would further add that Wikipedia does not claim to be a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)