User talk:Urbanfunky

Welcome!

Hello, Urbanfunky, 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 my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! - 2/0 (cont.) 08:03, 11 February 2011 (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

October 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Emotional Freedom Technique appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. N o f o rmation Talk  03:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Fringe science
You may want to read up on WP's WP:FRINGE policy to get an idea of how we treat fringe science. Also, for any medical claims, WP:MEDRS must be taken into account when considering sourcing. The sources you used in Emotional Freedom Technique are fringe sources and thus cannot be used in that way. WP reports the consensus of mainstream science and does not give WP:UNDUE weight to non-mainstream opinion. Thanks. N o f o rmation Talk  03:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's a sampling from the journals referenced. I don't see your point.
 * Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training is published by the American Psychological Association.
 * Psychology Journal has a normal editorial board: http://psychologicalpublishing.com/editorialboard.aspx
 * Energy Psychology has a normal editorial board: http://energypsychologyjournal.org/?page_id=5
 * The journal Psychological Medicine is published by Cambridge with an impact factor of 5.2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Medicine
 * NeuroImage is a leading journal with an impact factor of 5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeuroImage

Urbanfunky (talk) 04:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Emotional Freedom Technique. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Tgeairn (talk) 04:59, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively. Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. N o f o rmation  Talk  05:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

3RR
You have now violated 3RR. If you make one more reversion I will report you at the appropriate notice board and you will be blocked until the issue is resolved. WP users are expected to collaborate. You cannot edit war your preferred version into the article, that's just not how this place works. I notice you posted on the talk page, now you are expected to wait until other users respond and a WP:CONSENSUS is formed. N o f o rmation Talk  08:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I do not agree regarding 3RR, as quite significant edits were made to respect and reflect other editors' remarks. 3RR refers to reverts, of which you have made two.
 * Then your interpretation is wrong. There are plenty of users blocked for 3RR daily for doing only what you have done so far.  Since you appear to be a newer editor I assumed it would be better to cut you some slack rather than report you.   N o f o rmation  Talk  08:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I'll wait for feedback on the discuss page.
 * Thank you. My apologies if I came off as harsh.  Sometimes to hammer the 3RR point home it's best to be forward about it.  I'm glad you posted to the talk page and look forward to discussion.  N o f o rmation  Talk  19:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I wasn't aware that 3RR refers to changes of any kind, not just reverts. Thanks for explaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.20.169 (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)