User talk:Bbachrac/Archive 4

Reminder - Sanctions apply to topics in complementary and alternative medicine

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in complementary and alternative medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Hipal (talk) 21:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal I have no idea your status in the Editor hierarchy.

I have not attempted to edit a complementary and alternative medicine topic since 2020. As far as I know, participating in a Talk session is not editing a Wikipedia article.

I am however writing to Maryana Iskander, CEO, Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., (1 Montgomery Street Suite 1600, San Francisco, California 94104). The Feldenkrais Method^SM is a registered service mark of the :Feldenkrais Guild of North America. The Wikimedia Foundation raises money from its Wikipedia service in posting articles and therefore receives financial gain and has to respect registered Service Marks. Wikipedia :Editors are not free to misrepresent the topic or promote mis and dis-information.

I would appreciate if you inform me the best way to address the problems with the Arbitration Committee.

Thank you Bbachrac (talk) 02:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned that the approach you have been taking to address your concerns about Feldenkrais Method will likely end with you being blocked or banned. Editors need to work collaboratively, following Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Dispute resolution policy. Searching for alternatives won't work. --Hipal (talk) 02:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. In the past I sought to engage collaboratively with Editors, but on this topic I only found individuals yelling fringe, fraud and other ad hominem epithets who had no constructive intent. Currently I do not plan to do further editing or contributing within Wikipedia articles. I will post to my own blog how the Feldenkrais Method^SM article should be written. Perhaps you will find interesting Troubles in the Universe of the Mind. I will also follow through on writing to Wikimedia Foundation CEO and Legal Council about my concerns. Take Care Bbachrac (talk) 04:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot assume that the editors are working in good faith, then you should move on to other articles. Attempting to right great wrongs is unlikely to result in anything other that frustration for you. --Hipal (talk) 16:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please review Wikipedia:No legal threats. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal With regard to editing of National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCIIH)

You must have misread or misunderstood the change. All the wording in the change was directly from and referencing the links to the NCCIH web page. As I noted, the objective was to improve the description of NCIIH as it exists today with suitable links. I did not provide commentary, my own point of view, or my own personal analysis to Wikipedia article. Please explain why you thought that?

The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) is a United States government agency which explores Complementary, Alternative, or Integrative Health. NCCIH is one of the 27 institutes and centers that make up the National Institutes of Health (NIH) within the Department of Health and Human Services of the federal government of the United States.

Over the years, NCIIH mission and name have changed. NCIIH was initially created in 1991 as the Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM), and in 1998 renamed the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) before receiving its current name in 2014. Its stated mission is: "to define, through rigorous scientific investigation, the usefulness and safety of complementary and alternative medicine interventions and their roles in improving health and health care." Wikipedia has a related article complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).

Certain editors are taking a Non-Neutral Points of View and using Wikipedia to redefine or demean topics or subjects. Wikipedia should not be redefining NCIIH as it exists today.

Bbachrac (talk) 00:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sanctions apply. See WP:LINKSPAM, WP:SOAP, and WP:POV regarding [1]. Please note [2] is similarly problematic.

Please stop making accusations of others about POV, or anything else for that matter. --Hipal (talk) 01:50, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you can be The pot calling the kettle black? The Talk pages are for discussion on improving Wikipedia and that was what I was doing. Are you engaged in Wikipedia:WikiBullying? Bbachrac (talk) 16:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pointing out policy problems is not a threat

Re [3] [4] As I told the editor who was blocked for the behavior, Pointing out policy problems and how they are enforced is not a "threat". --Hipal (talk) 18:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. Bbachrac (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help with what I hope is an end to such comments. --Hipal (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022_1007

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, you may be blocked from editing. --Hipal (talk) 19:40, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Hipal (talk) 19:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MrOllie (talk) 20:16, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. [5][6][7] Hipal (talk) 20:12, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal I believe everything I edited was NPOV and properly sourced.

Please review Wikipedia:WikiBullying and Wikipedia:Harassment.

Bbachrac (talk) 00:35, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you mean. Seems like you're trying to change the subject from content policy and demonstrating behavioral problems in the process. But do explain. --Hipal (talk) 01:23, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

==October 2022== from @Dianna

Your edit to Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 13:52, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dianna Thank you. I thought I was citing and sourcing published information. Bbachrac (talk) 16:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding copyright material to Wikipedia is a violation of our copyright policy, even if you cite your source. — Diannaa (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dianna I realize this is a complicated subject, but according to Wikipedia:Quotations reliably sourced quotations are permitted in articles under fair use guidelines. Bbachrac (talk) 16:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have double checked your addition, and the content was not properly framed as a quotation. It was a bulleted list. Just want to note as well, I am not the person who removed the content, and it was not removed for copyright reasons.

Regarding quotations, Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. — Diannaa (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I understand you have a broad understanding of Wikipedia and proceed with professionalism in trying to improve Wikipedia.

You might find of interest the conclusions:

1) Quality of information sources about mental disorders: a comparison of Wikipedia with centrally controlled web and printed sources

2) Accuracy and completeness of drug information in Wikipedia

Bbachrac (talk) 21:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of Editing Alternative Medicine with Pyrrho the Skipper

@Pyrrho the Skipper I will start this later today Bbachrac (talk) 17:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This Discussion remained on Talk:Alternative medicine Bbachrac (talk) 20:23, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health/SandboxNCCIH

Hello, Bbachrac

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health/SandboxNCCIH for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

VickKiang (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bbachrac. I've deleted this page because it was a sandbox in mainspace. If you want to draft a new version of that article, I recommend creating a subpage, such as User:Bbachrac/NCCIH, or use your own sandbox. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 22:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and my apologies. Please proceed. Bbachrac (talk) 23:42, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and my apologies. Please proceed. Bbachrac (talk) 23:43, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]