User talk:Xris0

Welcome
Hello, Xris0, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - Zeibura (Talk) 17:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

A tag has been placed on Health Decisions, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on Talk:[[Health Decisions|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Zeibura (Talk) 17:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Commercial use of Image:Health Decisions logo.gif
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Health Decisions logo.gif, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Health Decisions logo.gif has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license GFDL-self to license it under the GFDL, or cc-by-sa-2.5 to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use PD-self to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Health Decisions logo.gif itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 15:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
Hi there, I was wondering if you would be interested in joining the WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology. If you would, we would be very happy to have you as a colleague. Tim Vickers 16:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Just added myself, thanks for recommending! --Xris0 17:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Welcome Xris0! The MCB project is a diverse group of people, and the project talk pages are great places to get feedback and ask general questions. If you had any specific questions about Wikipedia I'd be glad to help, just drop me a note on my talk page. All the best Tim Vickers 17:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fluoxetine
I saw your deletion of a section from the fluoxetine article, and although the section was quickly restored by another editor, I think I understand your reasoning for the deletion. So I located a few references from the primary scientific literature which support the claims in the disputed section and I have added them to the article. Hopefully this addresses your concerns. If not, please let me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The citations do not, I believe, at all support the assertion that fluoxetine decreases suicide risk. I do not have time to review them in detail, but they appear to be meta-analyses of previous literature. These meta-analyses usually (the ones I have read) fail to account for profound experiment bias, are often funded by the manufacturers themselves, and neglect data. The connection between that data and national suicide rates is, additionally, simply preposterous due to myriad confounding variables. There is a wealth of information contesting this assertion that fluoxetine and other SSRIs decrease suicide rates, and evidence existing that they may, in fact, increase it. I urge more research to make the entry more balanced, at minimum addressing allegations that SSRIs increase suicide risk no matter how much manufacturer-funded journal responses dismiss them as speculative.--Xris0 (talk) 21:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Fluoxetine
Dear Xris0,

Even before you restored your controversial paragraph in the Fluoxetine article, I had been reluctant to delete it. I had actually moved it to the Talk page, with the corresponding explanation (see Talk:Fluoxetine). What you say does ring true to me; unfortunately, it is hard to come up with any solid evidence in favor of the paragraph you wrote. Let's work on this together. Having solid evidence will give your point more weight. And on the other hand, it is not good for the article to have a highly controversial opinion without attribution. Even as you originally wrote it, there is no support for it in the following paragraphs- see the diff- Paul gene (talk) 01:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Rapid-Onset Obesity With Hypothalamic Dysfunction, Hypoventilation, and Autonomic Dysregulation Presenting in Childhood
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Rapid-Onset Obesity With Hypothalamic Dysfunction, Hypoventilation, and Autonomic Dysregulation Presenting in Childhood, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.cushings-help.com/rohhad.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:05, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Rapid-Onset Obesity With Hypothalamic Dysfunction, Hypoventilation, and Autonomic Dysregulation Presenting in Childhood
A tag has been placed on Rapid-Onset Obesity With Hypothalamic Dysfunction, Hypoventilation, and Autonomic Dysregulation Presenting in Childhood requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 05:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Flagging Health Decisions for further review
Hello, … I recently encountered the article about Health Decisions and in my opinion, it either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the Notability criteria for, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it violates a copyright.

I am considering tagging  for deletion according to the Deletion policy … I do not have time to examine the article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature.

I have created this initial entry on your Talk page because you are either the original author of the article, or else a recent contributor to it; I will leave more detailed information regarding my specific concerns about the article on its Discussion page … please respond either there or on this Talk page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.

Be sure to read Ownership of articles, and remember that Some Other Editors (including at least one administrator) may not share your opinion about the notability of the article's subject.

I do not mean to imply that your contribution is unappreciated … perhaps you should read Your first article … and remember, there was a time when I knew less about how Wikipedia works than you know right now

To better understand why I have used this template, please read Flag templates for deletion warnings ... I realize that some of the expressed possible concerns may not be appropriate in this case. —triwbe (talk) 16:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the barnstar. Paul Gene (talk) 20:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Crown of thorns
I'm afraid your recent move of this to a disam page is a) completely unnecessary, as the Christian one is plainly the primary one, and b) ballsed-up in several respects, as you haven't done anything about the effect of the page move on links, hatnote templates etc. The "reorganization" of the disam page is also poor - the Christian meaning is the one from which all others derive, and apart from the starfish all are utterly obscure. Please reverse it yourself, or I will have to go through the bother of doing so. Thanks Johnbod (talk) 18:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Criticisms of CBT
Dear Xris0

Regarding the correction you made on the CBT article. I am sure what you did is according to the rules of Wikipedia. Maybe you can help me find a proper way to make the contribution. I made a note here:. Leontaurus (talk) 19:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Transneuronal degeneration
A tag has been placed on Transneuronal degeneration requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

SmartPen listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect SmartPen. Since you had some involvement with the SmartPen redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Matthew C. Clarke 09:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hatebook
A tag has been placed on Hatebook requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. bonadea contributions talk 07:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Health Decisions for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Health Decisions 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/Health Decisions 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 18:00, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Enterobacter sakazakii enfamil
The sentence you removed from Enterobacter was taken from the AP news article in the ref right next to it. I will quote:


 * The formula has not been recalled, and the manufacturer said tests showed the batch was negative for the bacteria before it was shipped. Additional tests were under way.


 * "We decided it was best to remove the product until we learn more," Wal-Mart spokeswoman Dianna Gee said. "It could be returned to the shelves."

I don't really care if the sentence is gone, but given that subsequent tests also showed that the formula was not infected, it may end up being restored (or just remove the entire thing from the article as a false alarm and no longer notable).

Ariel. (talk) 13:24, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Limbus sign


A tag has been placed on Limbus sign requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Osarius : T : C : Been CSD'd? 19:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Limbus sign
Hello and thanks for your article about Limbus sign. I made some edits to resolve some of the tags that had been assigned but 2 remain: orphan and technical.

WP:AWB, an automated routine, assigns "orphan" when there are less than 3 articles that link to an article. In this case there are no articles that link to this page. Suggestions might be the limbus page or pages that deal with eye disorders.

It is also a tad techncial and would benefit from a little copy editing to make it more clear to laypeople.

I hope this helps!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Umbilical ring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Umbilicus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

"Spiro"
Hi there! In regards to your recent reversion on the spironolactone article, "spiro" is a very commonly used abbreviation for the drug in both the medical literature and especially among patients. A quick search of Google and Google Scholar will readily reveal that. In addition, I would just like to mention that simply because you have not heard of something is not, in my opinion, sufficient grounds to remove content. Proper research on the validity (or invalidity) of the information in question should always be done before removing content. Alternatively, if you have not done the research yourself and/or do not intend to, but nonetheless doubt or have reservations about the information in question, please simply add a citation needed template next time.

I have undone your change and added references for the use of the abbreviation to the spironolactone article. Thanks! el3ctr0nika (Talk | Contribs) 00:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of George Donnelly (libertarian)


A tag has been placed on George Donnelly (libertarian) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. undefined — Bill william compton Talk   14:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Step up to medicine, 2013
What is this source? Do you have an ISBN if it is a book, or a DOI if it is a scientific publication? Sources for medical content need to meet WP:MEDRS please. Lesion ( talk ) 20:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vitae Institute


The article Vitae Institute has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:35, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Assault rifle / Munich massacre
You removed the term assault rifle from the article Munich massacre with the edit comment 'rm improper terminology "assault rifles"'. Assault rifle is the correct description of the AKM, perhaps you have confused it with the term assault weapon, which would have been inappropriate. I have reverted your edit. ( Hohum  @ ) 18:05, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ANT1 (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on ANT1 (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
 * disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Boleyn (talk) 12:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Comments
Have replied to your comments here Talk:Ebola_virus_disease. As EM is sometimes used for the diagnosis per the WHO document direct identification appears to be a method of diagnosis. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:24, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

August 2018
Your recent editing history at Dianne Feinstein shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)