User talk:Ralphyde

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Ralphyde, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- GraemeL (talk) 00:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Psychogenic disease

Hi, thanks for the message. This article was deleted following a Proposed deletion, no-one objected to the deletion during the proposal period. Users expressed concern that the term psychogenic was not clearly enough differentiated from psychosomatic to warrant a separate article. There were further concerns that theory was not a mainstream one that had a attracted enough attention to make it notable. I will undelete the article but it must be improved or someone is likely to put it up for deletion again for the same reasons. Mallanox 22:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fibromyalgia

Hi,

The block of text you re-inserted in the introduction is already in the article in this section and should not be replaced in the introductory paragraph. See WP:LEAD for information on the kinds of things that should be included in an lead paragraph. Though the information should be included in the page itself, it is inappropriate for the very first couple lines and is more appropriately categorized as an aspect of treatment. WLU 18:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Without more sources beyond a popular literature book your claims are fringe statements which do not meet standards for reliable sources. Also note the section about exceptional claims. Modern science being 'way behind the curve' means that the treatments are unproven. 'People you know' being cured through this treatment puts your statements into the category of primary sources which can not be used to justify information on article pages. Until there are more, and more reliable sources documenting the psychogenic nature of fibromyalgia, it will not be placed in the lead section. WLU 19:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Forum

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Fasting are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. Please refrain from doing this in the future. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. WLU 15:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unwarranted pervasive linking to uncollaborated self-published work

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - Pacula 20:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add commercial material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. - Pacula 16:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. - Pacula 17:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, you will be blocked from editing. - Pacula 18:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


I have never used Wikipedia for advertising. I have a strong interest in Tension Myositis Syndrome, have read nine books by various authors about it, and I have simply attempted to repair damage you have done to that article by first marking it for deletion, even though it has been an article since January, 2004, with many cited updates by many people also interested in this well established topic, then on the very same day, you went through all the references and links to the article and deleted them. This is vandalism on a well cited subject about which you obviously know nothing. To call my attempts to repair the damage you have done "spamming" is not only absurd, but outrageous and arrogant. Tension myositis syndrome is a well established psychosomatic cause of chronic back and other pain, and has been well proven in clinical practice for more than thirty years by licensed physicians. For you to attempt to censor it is outrageous. In addition, this topic has nothing to do with any "uncollaborated self-published work" Ralphyde 18:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam-ish references being repeatedly readded to User talk:Pacula despite warnings

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User talk:Pacula may be offensive or unwelcome. If you are the user, please log in under that account and proceed to make the changes. Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. - Pacula 20:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Pleaes do not get into a revert war over a talk page - for one thing you can get blocked for violating the WP:3RR, for another thing, there's a lot of leeway for users on their own talk pages. Pacula is in the right to remove it if he wants, it's his talk page. It also makes you look bad in the long run and is a bad habit to get into. Just my opinion. WLU 21:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accusations of vandalism

I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop referring to the edits that I have been making on 'your' articles as 'vandalism'. Disagreeing with you does not make me a vandal, nor does it make attempts at cleaning up the bias in said articles 'non-NPOV', as you also seem to have a habit of claiming. May I politely suggest that you attempt to work with those editors who are attempting to find some kind of balance, rather than simply repeatedly undoing every attempt at cleanup, and stop with the accusations and insinuations. Making personal attacks is not going to get you anywhere - but trying to compromise will. - Pacula 11:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

What would you call it when a person with no knowledge about a subject, marks that article for rapid deletion when the article has been around since January, 2004, with numerous citations and constantly improved, then on the same day, he goes through the numerous references and links to that subject and proceeds to delete them all with no discussion? I would call that vandalism. Then, when attempts are made to restore the broken links between related subjects that have virtually destroyed the topic, he calls it "Spamming". I will try to refrain from calling you actions vandalism, but only as long as you stop calling my attempts to repair your damage, spamming, which it is certainly not, but is simply connecting related topics. Ralphyde 17:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR report

I've moved your complaint from the WP:AN3 to the more general WP:ANI. There does not seem to be a specific incident of localized revert warring to merit a 3rr complaint, but there is still obviously an issue here which will get more attention at WP:ANI. Thanks. Kuru talk 23:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cease-Fire request

OK, I think we both can agree that this situation with each of us constantly reverting the other's edits has gotten out of hand - not to mention making both of us look embarrasingly silly. I would therefore like to propose a 'cease-fire' of sorts - basically, that we stop chasing each other around with itchy trigger fingers on the 'undo' button. We also will need to find some means of compromising on the matters we were warring over, but I think that is something best discussed after we've both had a chance to calm down a bit. - Pacula 01:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll be happy to have a cease fire once I've finished repairing the damage you have done to links and citations between the various articles related to tension myositis syndrome. I won't be adding anything new, just restoring what you have deleted and broken to the way it was before you went on your rampage. If you knew anything at all about the subject, and put proper discussion on the talk page, I could respect your edits, but your massive destructive vendetta toward anything TMS has lost any respect I might have. Ralphyde 01:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Um, isn't that pretty much 'undoing'? Go ahead and 'put everything back the way it was' if you insist, but it will likely just need to be cleaned up again later, especially if the TMS/SI articles get deleted and merged into Dr. Sarno's (a very likely possibility, I think). I might have gotten over-zealous, but most of those links and references were inappropriate. Rather than just blindly restoring everything right off, why not pick the most important articles that were linked to before, and try to put the references back in a more neutral-point-of-view way? However you choose to continue, I'll be taking a crack at doing some of them myself after things have settled down a bit more. - Pacula 02:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD's

Hi there. Please note that AfD's are not the proper place for in-depth discussions of the motivations of others. If you'd like to continue to have such a conversation, please take it to the talk pages. Thank you. --Bfigura (talk) 17:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Ralphyde, this sort of discussion (diff: [1]) is NOT appropriate for AfD pages. Please refrain from this behavior. --Bfigura (talk) 19:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFD (cont)

Please note that this comment was made in spite of your actions end edits, not because of it. You should be thanking Parsifal for his efforts on TMS' behalf for essentially undoing the damage that your work has done to the page. Please read up on all the policies that were pointed out to you regards editing - it will make your life on wikipedia much simpler and reduce the chances of this happening in the future. At minimum, I recommend reviewing WP:5P, WP:OR, WP:N, WP:RS and WP:COI. WLU 22:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)