|This is Andrewman327's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Andrewman327.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
Books & Bytes New Years Double Issue
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
- please help translate this message into the local language
|The Cure Award|
|In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!|
We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)
Please comment on Talk:Ronn Torossian
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ronn Torossian. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to JSTOR through the TWL partnership described at WP:JSTOR . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email User:The Interior or User:Ocaasi sent several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 21:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are recieving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved.
Quoted material in Scientology as a Business article is irrelevant
After reviewing my own objections further, I realized my key objection this quote was really missed - the quotation is not about Scientology. It contains no information about Scientology. It only makes a cultural reference to Scientology that is based on internet-propagated mythology.
The quotation itself contains deeply flawed logic, but the mere fact that it is not about Scientology - even though the source article is about Scientology - should alone be sufficient grounds to remove it.
I would be willing to write an alternative, correctly researched passage the presents true information about Scientology services and their costs, if you feel that removing this passage would leave a hole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vantorrance (talk • contribs) 19:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)