User talk:Psychologist Guy

Soy boy

Hi, I just came across this article. I expanded the section on soy and men's health. If you happen to come across current meta studies, you may want to add them to the article. CarlFromVienna (talk) 10:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I know of a good review on soy. Simon Hill recently mentioned it, I will try and find it. Psychologist Guy (talk) 02:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meat nominated yesterday for "good article."

Talk:meat

Thought you might want to weigh in on that. Cordially, O Govinda (talk) 06:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I do not believe it is at the stage of a good article yet. I think it needs more work but I am busy with many other articles, it's not something I am able to put much time into. There is a mistake on the article, it says "unprocessed red meat has a smaller increase or no risk" in regard to coronary heart disease. The source listed is a review from 2012, this is outdated. We have more modern reviews than this, like these [1], [2], [3]. Both processed and unprocessed red meat increase CVD risk. Psychologist Guy (talk) 02:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join New pages patrol

Hello Psychologist Guy!

The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Dada Bhagwan.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dada Bhagwan.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tea critics has been nominated for renaming

Category:Tea critics has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Just noting someone's started a thread about you at ANI, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § User: Psychologist Guy. Primefac (talk) 18:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inviting your review of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami has just been expanded and updated with new reliable sources, images, and media. As one of its most involved editors, your contribution would be very much appreciated. Many thanks. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 16:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael R. Eades

Hi PG,

if I'd file a deletion request on this redirect to enable it as redlink - would it go through?

Kind regards, Tadarrius Bean (talk) 16:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

The Michael R. Eades Wikipedia article does not exist. It's never been created as a biography. It only exists as a redirect to Protein Power. There is no point in linking to the Michael R. Eades article on the Protein Power article because it just redirects on itself. I find it unlikely a Wikipedia article for Michael R. Eades will be created, there are not enough stand alone references to establish a biography. However, if the article is created one day, then yes it can be linked to. Psychologist Guy (talk) 16:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to file a deletion request on the Michael R. Eades redirect since he is not treated sufficiently at Protein Power. May you please be so kind to tell me the steps necessary?--Tadarrius Bean (talk) 16:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you think there is enough information about the author to create their own article, I'd first suggest working through the steps on Your-First-Article before worrying about deleting the redirect. Q ^{T C} 16:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@OverlordQ: Thanks, but I've never wanted to write an article about Mr. Eades. I'm a foreigner; in my language we have less redirects and more redlinks.--Tadarrius Bean (talk) 16:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the same mistake with Gordon Hempton. Shall I file a Template:Db?--Tadarrius Bean (talk) 18:06, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]