User talk:Richard8081

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 10:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

WP:BOLD
Please see WP:BOLD. Just go ahead and fix whatever yoou think should be fixed in any articles per WP:RS and WP:NPOV. There is a chance that someone will correct or revert your edit, but at least it will be clear what exactly you suggest. Otherwise, it will be one unproductive discussion. Happy editing, My very best wishes (talk) 19:53, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia
Hi Richard8081 - I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia as well as articles about health. Based on this edit and your follow up with Doc James here, it appears that you have a conflict of interest. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and questions for you below.

Hello, Richard8081. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Comments and question
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by out WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with the patent you cite, the SuperMannan product, or the companies that might make or sell it? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, with please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Thanks!

You can reply here - I am watching this page. Once you do, we can take it from there. Thanks in advance for talking! Jytdog (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

No problem. Here's the disclosure(s):

Biochemist Richard Katz = richard8081 is the sole patentholder on US Patent Number 8,063,026. Richard Katz, Clair Brown, and Michael McCulloch are the three shareholders in Belvedere Environmentals LLC, a California corporation whose sole product is SuperMannan(TM).

END disclosure

(unless we need more disclosure, of course.)

Commentary by richard8081 --

Wikipedia is mostly dedicated to -- one way or the other -- telling the truth in an encyclopedia-like way. Hence the rules. Obviously I could write more about bladder infections/urinary tract infections/UTI but as you and Doc James and Cullen too are all too well aware, EVERYTHING one says on the subject is subject to endless debate; note the protective padlock (semiprotected, I believe); hence I'm totally into the brevity thing. Just keep it simple: The fact that the USPTO granted a certain patent; and that that patent has been reduced to practice; and that that practice has been the subject of a peer reviewed article in a reputable journal that documents the efficacy of that practice. (I'm a bit puzzled by the Message I got via WP that "case series are not proof of efficacy"; I'm not a physician, I'm just a simple biochemist, but that pronouncement is, well, just not the case :-).)

Let me finish up here by saying one or two things about me: I've been logged in for quite a few years here as richard8081 (always wondered who could possibly be richard808, like, surely I'm the first richard808; How could this BE?  okay, I'll be richard8081)  and have contributed so far all these years only on Talk pages. I don't know how many Talk pages I've edited, but enough so that one time recently I was reading the Contributions on a talk page about the Krebs Cycle -- the article is Citric Acid Cycle -- and I was thinking, "My my, that fellow really is quite amusing, and really knows his stuff" and was ever so pleasantly surprised to see that the Contributor was ... richard8081! (saying that a fellow driving a Buick is definitely an organism, and definitely not conservative of energy; it was synecdochic.) In all these years I've never had the occasion to start a new article or Edit a section of an extant article, simply because the occasion didn't arise where I knew more about it than the Contributors. That figures; you go on Wikipedia to learn and in a sense observe, so if most everything is in apple pie order and according to Hoyle, well, just enjoy and take it all in. (and yes, I suffered like everybody else through the early days; vandalism all over the place. I thought we were goners there for a bit.)  The one lesson -- one guideline; incontrovertible rule -- I picked up was when we all agreed on OR. I learned everything from that: In my research, I had a virtual sign up in front of me all the time, something like "What would Wikipedia say?" OR is always suspect; verified research, well, it's been verified. Nothing's perfect but at least nothing's OR. Nature decides what's true (in the natural sciences, eg biology; hence biochemistry, and physiology. Medicine too.) (I think Max Planck said that, Nature decides what's true.) Hence the peer reviewed UroToday article reviewed by a group of urologists. The USPTO isn't exactly in the peer review department; but trust me, one's stuff has not been properly raked over the coals until it's been examined by the reviewers -- the Examiner -- at the Patent Office. The rarity of patent citations on WP attests mostly to how hard they are to get; ie how rare it is to come up with something that is useful, or interesting, enough to be on WP; and was the subject of a patent Grant; floating about in the vast sea of very interesting facts and observations that constitute our public domain. Richard8081 (talk) 17:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note,  I have replies on two levels.  First, the conflict of interest level.  Management of COI in Wikipedia has two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review.    You are clearly a published scientist so you know the drill on academic publishing and disclosure of COI when you present or submit a manuscript.  In Wikipedia, that disclosure should go on the relevant article Talk page (which I already did for you), and on your user page (which is here: User:Richard8081). Would you please take care of that?
 * The peer review" piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and viola there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done.  No intermediary.  What we ask editors who have a COI to do, is a) if you create an article, submit it through the WP:AFC process so it can be reviewed before it publishes.  b) And if you want to change content in an existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself.  You can do make the edit request easily -  and provide notice to the community of your request -  by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline.  I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at Talk:Urinary tract infection -  there is a link at "click here" in that section --  if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.
 * Will you please make the COI disclosure on your user page, and agree to follow the peer review processes? Thanks!


 * The second level has to do with sourcing of health content in Wikipedia, I will deal with in a new section, so this one remains focused on the COI stuff. Jytdog (talk) 22:02, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:27, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes the defaults'll fool ya
I've been logged in to Wikipedia since 2007; it's now 2015; and I JUST realized / noticed that the default for email notifications of messages etc in one's Preferences is "unchecked" = off = no, don't. Or maybe for some reason back in 2007 I turned them off, like unchecked them. Richard8081 (talk) 12:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)