User talk:MastCell/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →

Contents

Page Moves

I just saw you move Chloroma to Chloromabb to BBBcoma, and then copy and paste from BBBcoma to Chloroma. This removed the page history from the page, which is not allowed under the licensing Wikipedia uses. I suggest you straighten this out at requested moves since an administrator has to fix it now. Timrem 17:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

My bad... still learning how to do things. I've listed it on the Cut-and-paste repairs page to get straightened out. Thanks for your attention. MastCell 17:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
It has been fixed by an admin. Apologies again. MastCell 18:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Medical advice

I think that the wiki has a policy of not giving medical advice, or this what I got a message about once. Snowman 17:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I changed parts of the bone marrow biopsy page from advice to a tutorial style. Snowman 08:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

References

Hi. When adding references to an article it is easy to use this tool to create a reference that uses the cite journal template from only a pmid as found in pubmed. --WS 00:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Section ordering

I saw you put the see also section in acute myelogenous leukemia back at the end of the article. However it is described in the wikipedia manual of style that this section should be placed before the references and external links sections. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings)#Standard appendices. --WS 21:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:Speedy action

I'm just glad I was able to deal with it before it got out of hand. Keep a close eye for other page moves that may be done by Residuals' sockpuppets (or so he claims). --Nishkid64 00:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Accusations you made against Harvey Bialy

Randroide 08:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)I see no external (not wiki) source for you grave accusation against Harvey Bialy. Please provide us with that external source. You MUST do it. Thank you.

One can find any number of uncouth Bialy quotes here, including the one which I mentioned. However, my source was the dissident AIDSWiki, which proudly publicized Bialy's comments here. By the way, it was not so much a "grave accusation" as a direct quote from Bialy which he himself has gone out of his way to publicize. An accusation is unnecessary; his words speak for themselves. MastCell 17:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
The accusation was to say that Bialy said that, but seems that he said it. We do not know what was said in the previous dialogue with the other guy, though.
Wikipedia is a tertiary source, and anyone can write anything. That´s the reason I asked you for an external source. Anyway, thank you for the references.Randroide 18:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
No problem; you were right to demand a source. I didn't mean to give you a hard time about that. MastCell 18:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
It´s all O.K. Thank you : )Randroide 19:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

AIDS Reappraisal

Could you please explain me this, ,MastCell?. I can not understand the blanking of these links, but I am sure you had a good reason to make that. Could you please explain me that reason?. Thank you. Randroide 09:23, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Please see the talk page of the relevant article for discussion. MastCell 16:42, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Depo Provera talk

Thanks for request commentary on Talk:Depo Provera, I've tried not to take sides - I well appreciate your intentions to help improve this article and that you probably have greater familiarity than myself with the research into this area. As you invited the commentary, having recognised your own sense of "getting more argumentative", I've mostly focused on your style of debate. However I did feel only fair to then offer as an example an alternative wording to one of Cindery's postings too. I truely do not wish to cause either of you ill feeling, so please read the points as positive friendly constructive suggestions. In the spirit of NPOV, I am sure you can work with Cindery to find an acceptable phrasing over the various points and so help resolve the impass :-) David Ruben Talk 01:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Here, I'll even help you out, "MastCell"

[Personal attack removed] darin 69.252.201.61 21:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I think now, based on your behavior the last two days, that you probably did engage in borderline wikistalking, and that you are probably are personally over-engaged with reacting to me out of aniumus. What I find disturbing is that I have made an effort to completely disengage with you/have carefully worded all my comments on EC talkpage, but you still seem quite hostile --your kneejerk accusation of OR yesterday that you had to cross out, your inappropriate comment today which I just ignored re "the sulfurous smell of pharmaceutical companies" or whatever...It's not necessarily assuming bad faith to point obvious things like that out--it can also be called "naming the conflict," per meatballwiki. If you find yourself, as you said, "being more argumentative than you should," you should make an extra effort to disengage emotionally, not find ways to amplify your engagement, like writing aggrieved opinionated notes to my talkpage, full of inappropriate accusations. This is a "content over community" endeavor, and I am not obligated to personally engage with you. Please leave me alone, and restrict your comments to impersonal discussion on the talkpages of articles. Cindery 07:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

You've leveled a number of accusations toward me and then accused me of being "over-emotional" when I've attempted to address them or engage in dispute resolution. I'd prefer to resolve our differences and work together. If that proves completely impossible, then I will happily leave you alone. MastCell 12:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree that disengagement is probably a good idea at this point. However, leveling a lengthy series of accusations and then erasing any response or attempt at explanation and olive branch extension from your talk page without a trace, with an edit summary alleging "further harrassment", is not exactly disengagement.
I've edited controversial pages before, and tempers certainly flare, but I've never before been accused of such a wide range of violations in such a short time by someone with whom I really have no major content disagreements. It's instructive to see that I'm not the first (or second, or third) editor with whom you've reached such a meltdown, including many with cooler heads than I. I also note that there was discussion of an RfC regarding your conduct in the past, and that Severa pointed to his/her interaction with you as one of the decisive moments leading to his/her departure from Wikipedia. Encouragingly, some editors have moved beyond any disputes to work productively with you; I hope this is possible in our case.
I mention these things because your edits are generally high-quality and you've improved quite a few important pages, and your contributions to the articles make Wikipedia a better place. I'd encourage you to learn something from our dispute in terms of how you interact with other editors (I certainly have), as a pattern is in danger of emerging. Disengagement is a logical next step at this point; I'll keep discussion article-focused, but at the same time it seemed useful to respond to the above accusations. MastCell 20:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Medicine Collaboration of the Week

 Thank you for your support of the Medicine Collaboration of the Week.
This week Crohn's disease was selected.
Hope you can help…

WS 20:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:RichardHofstadter.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:RichardHofstadter.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Oden 05:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images in user namespace

Hello! You have used a fair use image in your user namespace. Criterion 9 of the Wikipedia:Fair use criteria states that "Fair use images may be used only in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are not covered under the fair use doctrine." I have removed it on these grounds. Sincerely, --Oden 05:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Christine Maggiore

[Moved to Talk:Christine Maggiore]

RE: Removal of stupid text

I just so happened to be reviewing stuff I've done on the Wikipedia (and what kind of trouble I've caused :) when I ran across a (useless) change I made to the Steven Milloy article that you rolled back. I got a laugh out of your summary statement. [1]  :)

Daniel Santos 06:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

"Junkscience"

Hi Mastcell. (Mastcell?) .. I am clearly spending too much time on WIkipedia! I read the "Milloy" article, and I agree with your comments re global warming - that is indeed what is plastered all over the Junkscience site. I also noted that there is quite a bit of redundancy in the article. I have not edited it before, so would have to go back and look at its organization....but thought I would comment on what struck me about the article. I am a bit surprised that Mr. Milloy has not called evolution "Junkscience". Jance 00:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

"its/it's It's really not that hard to use each word in its proper manner..." How about I/me/myself? ("Myself" is not a predicate nominative, or the object of a preposition)

Please check out asbestos and the law and let me know what you think. I also rewrote medical malpractice to something other than a whining for tort reform, and how evil lawyers are. I have also worked on non-euclidean geometry although am just starting, and would be intersted in looking more into Riemann and Lobachevsky. Both had different theories of non-Euclidean geometry based on a supposition of NOT 5th postulate --- but that tracks with Tom Lehrer. Much as I love Tom Lehrer as well, I have refactored a lengthy quotation from his immortal song "Lobachevsky", which Jance had added, for reasons of space. --MastCell

Re:User Name

Thanks I do indeed like Foucault's Pendulum very much indeed Belbo Casaubon 13:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

On 159.105.80.219

I think it may become time to open up a WP:RFC on User_talk:159.105.80.219. I have just given him a Wikipedia:Civility warning. Samboy 21:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Would you help and be my mentor?

I am new, very new, and I haven't a clue about this site. I have already made mistakes on my user page which you can read. I don't know how to do those links, sorry. I am disabled and on a lot of meds for multiple medical problems and have trouble remember things. So I need someone with patience and with the lurking I have done, you see to. If you don't or can't that's ok, just let me know on my site. I appreciate you listening to me.

--Crohnie 03:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've responded on your talk page. MastCell 04:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)