User talk:CorticoSpinal

/Archive 1

Campaign to discredit a scientific chiropractor

I have recently been the target of a campaign by a group of skeptical chiropractic editors who have made accusations that is tantamount to character assissination. I have been called an "anti-scientific" editor, "sockpuppet" and accusations of being engaged in an edit war. I appear to be getting stalked as well, no doubt that I am on the skeptics watch list. I have already mentioned several times that some edits made by myself, under a 208 IP it was because I was away from my computer and it timed out and hadn't noticed that I was not signed in. Anyways, I am here to state equivocally that I have not engaged in any edit war or sockpuppetry at Chiropractic and genuinely want to be a valuable contributor to the Wikipedia project. It's too bad these experienced editors are using WP:BITE tactics as a source of intimidation, but I know that the accusations labelled against me are untrue and is likely part of a smear campaign against myself. EBDCM (talk) 22:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Indefinite block reinstated

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. See the thread at the Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents page. The spurious accusations against another editor were the last straw. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Raymond Arritt, please explain how you consider me defending myself against attacks from the anti-chiropractic bandwagon is spurrious and or disruptive. Unbelievable. EBDCM (talk) 22:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

OrangeMarlin used a Twinkle to revert the anons edits which, according to my understanding, is a usedto help deal with acts of vandalism. If it was not vandalism, then why use this script? Is this not a miuse/abuse of of a util? EBDCM (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not infallible. You're welcome to get another admin to review the block and my actions in this case. If they feel the block should be overturned I won't fight it. Just for the record, I don't have any interest or knowledge of chiropractics as a topic other than that some people in my family have used it for relief of back pain. Raymond Arritt (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I find it very disheartening the way this has all transpired. Anon engages in an edit war lives in the same province as myself and I am accused and sentenced of edit warring and sockpuppetry. Spurrious allegations? I was called anti-scientific (look above) by OrangeMarlin (a personal attack nonetheless) and I get banned for telling him to tread carefully. Common, Raymond let's look at the whole picture here, not simply Fyslee's original research. Please reconsider and let's take this to a panel, jury or something. EBDCM (talk) 23:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

CorticoSpinal (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

See below

Decline reason:

There is no consensus to unblock you at Wikipedia:ANI#EBDCM. Explaining how others supposedly misbehaved does not justify any misbehaviour on your part. — Sandstein (talk) 09:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Moreschi calls me a quack [1] for no good reason, another PERSONAL attack and uncivil comment against me. I get called anti-scientific twice by OrangeMarlin[2], [3] (a PERSONAL ATTACK or at the very least an uncivil) one, ask him to tread carefully then I get slapped with a WP:LEGAL for threats. This is tremendously upsetting. Then, there is a snide comment about "snowmobiling and using sled dogs" [4] by OrangeMarlin, like I can somehow drive 1 hour from home, engage in an edit war, and drive back another hour, all this in the middle of work week, nonetheless. Let's look into this matter a bit more, you'll see that it doesn't add up. Lastly, OrangeMarlin used a Twinkle to revert the anons edits which, according to my understanding, is a usedto help deal with acts of vandalism. If it was not vandalism, then why use this script? Is this not a miuse/abuse of of a util? This is the reason, alone, I accused OM of vandalism. If my interpretation is incorrect, then it was an honest mistake. EBDCM (talk) 00:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

IP Locator as evidence

So, like I had already mentioned several times before; we in Northern Ontario have only 1 Internet provider. This provider covers a huge geographical area and many residents. The central server appears to be based in Timmins, ON. I do not live even live in or near Timmins, ON. An anon user who was engaged in an edit war on chiropractic appears to also be from Northern Ontario, which, incidentally, stretches from Thunder Bay (West) to Virginiatown (East). There are over 100 000 residents in the North who use Northern Telephone as it is the ONLY INTERNET PROVIDER IN THE NORTH. So ANY IP from Northern Ontario will be directed to Timmins. Give me a break. The evidence presented against me was "similar indentations". Gee, let's see now, how looking at tone, language, grammar, etc. "evidence". One can clearly look and see that is definitely not my writing style. Let's have some level-headed admins look into this; Mr. Arrit's indefinite block is in itself "spurrious". EBDCM (talk) 22:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

This editor is clearly getting a bum deal here. . . he has been banned with little to no evidence of wrongdoing. If all this is about is civility issues then this extended block is not justified. . . this editor has been provoked and has reacted as many newbies do. If this is a vote I move to unblock him.TheDoctorIsIn (talk) 07:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Doc, I'm beginning to really lose faith in the systems here. I get harassed, attacked, accused and now blocked indef for "vandalism". If all that had to be done was to insert quotation marks to make the edits stick; why not just do that rather than engage in an edit war? I can appreciate Eubulides' expertise on medicine (he has made good contribs to those articles) but it seems like the same respect for my expertise on chiropractic/physical medicine is not being reciprocated.

According to Fyslee my contributions "aren't worth it". If you look at the Chiropractic article prior to Jan 22/08 and where it is now you can see the impact that I have made. The article, though apparently "stable" was a POS compared to where it is now and where it's going to go. The chiropractic skeptics here at Wikipedia can't silence scientific chiropractors forever. As it stands I'm going to re-evaluate whether or not it's really worth being here because I am "working" for free and spending valuable time contributing to the project but all I seem to get in return are false allegations, unjustifiably long blocks (indefinite both times) whereas users like Quack Guru get off scot free (supposed to be under a 1RR; reverted 3x the day of the edit war) and OrangeMarlin who get away with making nonsense claims "He advocates for a procedure that is unsupported by science or clinical studies"[5] suggesting I'm one dimensional, anti-science practitioner. Anyways, thanks for the words of encouragement, and feel free to add quotation marks to the WHO stuff I added under education, and scope of practice. Those 2, at the very least, should stick. Hopefully we can get an agreement on safety; but it seems the medical brigade wants to dictate all the terms and make it look and sound a lot worse than it really is. Happy Easter. EBDCM (talk) 14:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Still playing the victim. Until you understand why you got blocked and learn from it, you'll forever feel the victim. You were not blocked for vandalism. You were blocked for evading a block and for continuing the behavior that got you indef blocked in the first place. IOW you violated an agreement, thus breaking your "probation" and got busted for it. You also are misquoting me. I wrote: "his dictatorial and uncollaborative spirit have made him more of a liability than he's worth," [6]. -- Fyslee / talk 15:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Fyslee: I was not evading ANY block. You keep on spreading lies about me. Your witch hunt is probably the lowest thing I've experienced since high school. Look at my history, EBDCM, 208IP and my limited account from spring 2007. You are passing judgement on me, and you have absolutely no right to do so. We all know you are the "chiropractic quackbuster" and what you really want here. To silence the credible, scientific wing of chiropractic. But, you're going to do nothing except make a matyr of me. I've let some of my classmates know about this situation here. Expect a nice influx of evidence-based chiropractors to come here and finish the job, making Chiropractic completely NPOV and the best damn alternative med article around. Peace, Fyslee. EBDCM (talk) 22:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Chiropractic Scope of Practice

According to Eubulides "The inserted material was duplicative (how many times is the article going to say chiropractic doesn't use medicines or surgery) and somewhat out of place; most of it was about diagnosis and treatment rather than scope of practice. My question is this: What do diagnoses and treatment fall under? It's scope of practice, period. There is an ongoing attempt to "play down" any information which would seem to make DCs look like legitimate health care providers. Taken from page 26/51 of the World Health Organization guidelines [7] you can clearly see that chiropractic practice involves "a general and specific range of diagnostic methods including skeletal imaging, laboratory diagnostics, orthopaedic and neurological evaluations as well as observational and tactile assessments. Patient management involves spinal adjustment and other manual therapies, rehabilitative exercises, supportive and adjunctive measures as well as patient education and counseling". This is EXACTLY what the scope of practice is for chiropractic, and do not let Eubulides or anyone else say that it's not true or does not belong under scope of practice. We are legitimate health care providers and deserve to be treated as such. Whomever may read this, add the quotation marks and then the edit should stick. It's from the WHO therefore is representative all of chiropractic jurisdictions. EBDCM (talk) 15:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Anyone who follows your advice can get blocked for acting as a proxy for a banned user. Since you seem to intend to exert an influence on Wikipedia through your talk page, I recommend you be totally blocked from access to Wikipedia. -- Fyslee / talk 15:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Fyslee, please leave me alone. EBDCM (talk) 22:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)