User talk:Mabidex

Talk to me on the webpage discussion if this is in regards to resveratrol supplements. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Resveratrol#Resveratrol_Supplements

May 2012
Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Allens (talk &#124; contribs) 21:02, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Alans, I was not attacking you or anyone else. The fact is that you are posting improper citations on the wikipedia term 'Cycloastragenol'. The edits that I rolled back can be seen on the history page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cycloastragenol&action=history. As you can see I have already warned you on "19:49, 12 May 2012‎" about banning you should you continue to cite incorrect or improper references for this term. In fact I didnt use the template at that time, however I will add the warning template now regarding the citation issue. Should improper citations be continually posted, I will ask another admin who has been here far longer than I have to review the 'Cycloastragenol' term and judge to citations you have added. I will ask him to ban you should he feel I have warned you properly about the use of such citations.

--Mabidex (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2012 (UTC)


 * First, you are not an administrator; I just checked. Second, your past edit summaries are, in fact, personal attacks. I will not report you at the present time unless you repeat the offense. Third, primary sources are, in fact, usable for a number of purposes - not for justifying the existence of a page, no, but they weren't there for that purpose. Fourth, the template you applied is for provably incorrect information, not for my error (namely OR) for which I've already apologized. Fifth, I will be reconstructing the TA-65 page, without OR, but with two journal citations (plus a website link to the TA Sciences page, which is quite proper, insofar as they're referenced in both journal citations). They are, moreover, referenced in the first citation in the cycloastragenol page as the suppliers of the substance in question for research. Sixth, I suspect you are thinking I'm shilling for TA Sciences - that I'm trying to promote them; just the opposite - they probably don't want people to realize the substance in question isn't patented. Allens (talk &#124; contribs) 23:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

The first citation was taken out, because it talks about TA-65, not Cycloastragenol (I just checked the abstract). TA-65 is a material that is available at TA Sciences, that is correct... however the page is about Cycloastragenol, not TA-65. That citation should be put in the TA-65 page. Mixing citations in this manner is what makes this an issue, and hurts wikipedia's credibility. As for being an Admin, I know one that can handle this should improper citations keep coming up.

--Mabidex (talk) 23:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

DS Alert

 * --Jorm (talk) 06:45, 21 January 2021 (UTC)