User talk:Podpoodle

Note to readers
This page is subject to regular malicious defacement by a singular podiatrist who cannot come to terms with current legislation. Foot Health Practitioners are not to be confused with podiatrists, who are subject to regulation in the United Kingdom by the Health Professions Council. HPC regulation is considered necessary where there is a perceived threat to the public. The HPC has no plans to regulate FHPs. Foot Health Practitioners have nothing whatever to do with the profession of podiatry, or the HPC.

If 'FACTS' occur on this page they are untrue, incorrect, misinformed and misleading. They are not part of the legitimate article which remains factual and unbiased according to Wikirules.

Following an administrator's block on this page ended 5th March 2012 because of 'editing war', the defacement of the page persists, as before. I have now, 28th March 2012, posted notice of copyright upon the information content of the page. I would appreciate the help of an administrator to discuss what can be done to stabilise this pagePodpoodle (talk) 12:36, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Foot health practitioner
Your repeated changes to the category declarations on foot health practitioner are incorrectly formatted, and are causing the article to repeatedly bounce back onto the uncategorized articles list again. As of today, I have had to retag the article as uncategorized at least seven times in the past 18 months, every single time because you replaced the existing category with a new one that was either incorrectly formatted or entirely nonexistent. Once can be an understandable and forgivable mistake, but seven times is simply disruptive and unacceptable.

If you have a problem with the categories that people are choosing, you are allowed to change them if you format the new categories correctly — but the onus is on you to learn how to correctly recategorize an article, because if I ever see the page back on the uncategorized articles list again it's going to be locked down so that you can't edit it at all. I don't care who's right and who's wrong about what the topic is or isn't; if you want to correct errors on Wikipedia you still have to do so without being disruptive about it. Bearcat (talk) 19:02, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)