User talk:Nalbert123

Welcome!
Hello, Nalbert123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Tea House, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Nomination of Schaffer's mill for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Schaffer's mill is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Schaffer's mill until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Adding false information to the encyclopedia
In this edit (which someone else has already reverted) you added the following unsourced and false information to the encyclopedia:


 * "...however, some individuals are able to feel the effects and the harm of electromagnetic radiation more than others."

Nobody is able to feel non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. This has been tested in double-blind clinical trials multiple times (see the references in our Electromagnetic hypersensitivity article. The alleged sufferers cannot tell whether electromagnetic radiation is or isn't present. If you wish to introduce claims that they can detect EMR to the article, you must first find a WP:MEDRS-compliant reference that says that. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Electromagnetic hypersensitivity.


 * You did it again. Do it one more time and you will end up at WP:ANI --Guy Macon (talk) 04:55, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

This is not falsified information. Electromagnetic radiation is a real condition and is actually recognized in Sweden. Just because you are employed by AT&T and Verizon to spread lies that their products are safe and just because you personally don't suffer from this condition and just because you don't see the people who suffer from it does not mean that it is not real. Thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies have proven that pulsed electromagnetic radiation can be harmful and debilitating to people who are sensitive. Grow up and learn the facts. Nalbert123 (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Bullshit.
 * "A number of studies have been conducted where EHS individuals were exposed to EMF similar to those that they attributed to the cause of their symptoms. The aim was to elicit symptoms under controlled laboratory conditions.
 * The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals. Well controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms were not correlated with EMF exposure.
 * There are also some indications that these symptoms may be due to pre-existing psychiatric conditions as well as stress reactions as a result of worrying about EMF health effects, rather than the EMF exposure itself."
 * Source: Word Health Organization
 * Also, I have never worked for AT&T, Verizon, or any other cell phone company. Please stop telling lies about me. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Also, FYI (since I'm so tired of this old canard) EHS is emphatically not a recognized diagnosis in Sweden: "Today there is no scientific support for a causal relationship between symptoms and electromagnetic fields. [...] With reference to the current research situation, the National Board of Health and Welfare is of the opinion that there is no evidence that EHS is a disease. [...] EHS is therefore not a medical diagnosis." The TL;DR of the rest is that disability, grants to support organizations etc are based on symptoms only with no judgement as to their cause. Kolbasz (talk) 09:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

January 2017
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Guy Macon. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. ''Your repeated accusations of vandalism and violations of policy constitute a personal attack. Continued accusations will result in a report being filed at the Administratror's Noticeboard, and is very likely to result in you being blocked from editing.'' MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  15:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

ANI Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive943. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

January 2017
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for personally attacking other editors. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Unblock
--UTRSBot (talk) 02:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The block is ostensibly for the personal attacks, which go way beyond not being "respectful", and your apparent assumption that an editor who upholds Wikipedia's policy of echoing the current consensus of peer-reviewed scientific sources must be in the pay of big business. That's the kind of conspiracy theory nonsense that has no part to play in Wikipedia, and you will need to change the way you approach fringe medical topics (see WP:FRINGE) if you wish to be successful as a Wikipedia editor. That means not including unsourced or poorly sourced claims in medical articles, using only WP:MEDRS-compliant sources to support factual medical claims, not edit warring to reinstate disputed claims, not casting aspersions on the motives of those who disagree with you, and using the talk page to seek consensus whenever you want to add disputed material or you have changes reverted. I'll leave your unblock request open in case you want to update it to cover any of these things. As it stands, I would decline it, as you appear to think you are blocked "because I represented the minority viewpoint", and that is very much not the case - I suspect you would benefit from reading WP:WEIGHT too. (updated) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, I should also address your statement that "I do not believe he had the authority to make such statements as he had no background authority in these matters, being an electrical engineer and not a health expert". Wikipedia article content is not decided on the authority of the contributing editors, but on the sources they use to support their claims and on consensus through discussion when there is any disagreement. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:49, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * instead of being helpful and telling me why the evidence I was providing was insufficient - he just called it "vandalism". This is a bald-faced lie: Just look four sections above. MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  13:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Reviewing admin:  Please note the unblock request at User talk:24.209.149.213. Seems like a WP:LOGOUT attempt to me. --JustBerry (talk) 02:20, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also note that 24.209.149.213 resolves to cpe-24-209-149-213.wi.res.rr.com (Time Warner Cable) while the harassing email mentioned at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive943 came from " [at] stu.waukesha.k12.wi.us>", both in Wisconsin, USA. See Talk:Electromagnetic hypersensitivity/Archive 7. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that I have blocked, who is ✅ from this user, and whose user page previously included links to websites related to this account's edits. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:15, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * In this edit InterLinked added to his talk page, them moved it to his user page. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

I have deleted your user page for you, as requested, but we do not delete user talk pages. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2017 (UTC)