User talk:Facts00

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Facts00, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Jytdog (talk) 21:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Paleolithic diet. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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. – Joe (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No need for me to give a warning. Already done. If you revert again you will undoubtedly be blocked. I have opened a Talk discussion here: Talk:Paleolithic_diet#Fad_diet. You can reply there after you have read the archives. Please also read the links in the Welcome message above, to learn how Wikipedia works. There are actually policies and guidelines put in place by the community itself that govern both content and behavior (edit warring as you have done is not ok behavior, per the policy cited above) Jytdog (talk) 21:28, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Paleo[edit]

Hey respect that fact that hardcore wiki contributors are going to follow everything in wiki world. I am not going to read thousands of posts in regards to what is fad or not fad. I have been in the fitness/health industry for over 25 years, read thousands of articles, scientific journals ect ect ect. I understand the necessity of citing for everything, but you are citing junk, not actual scientific fact. There is not science calling paleo a fad, and we can argue about what is fad and not, but at the end of the day but saying or citing that it is indeed a fad, you (and not you personally or specifically) are creating a falsehood based on nothing. Facts00 (talk) 22:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Paleolithic diet. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Further explanation regarding your editing issues: you broke the three revert rule on the above article. While you may in fact believe that you're right, the information you were removing was cited and backed up by significant discussion on the article talk page, where you were advised to go to inform yourself prior to making further changes. If you wish to change the wording in the article, you must have cited facts to back it up, and on many of the alternative health pages Wikipedia features these facts have been researched heavily over the years due to the contentious nature of the subjects. I suggest that if you wish to make this kind of change to the article that you provide good, firm cited research on the talk page and encourage other editors to help out.

I also advise against "getting around" the block, as you have suggested. There are ways of "getting around" sockpuppeting too. Cheers. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That IP edit seems to have been done while I was warning you, so I won't extend your block, but do it again and I certainly will. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:19, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Calcium[edit]

not to mention the ridiculous "fact" stating that paleo diet can lead to calcium deficiency, are you serious??????????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Facts00 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are ways around if I want to place that much time and energy into it, not now to many things. Sad, though, really. I have always gone to wiki for sources of info and have stuck up for it when others for this very reason have vowed never to use.

Your simply citing things that are not factually true, and its a shame thats its up here and people will read and believe. Hope you do some good scientific research and realize the errors you are making. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Facts00 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

as I noted above, both content and behavior are governed by policies and guidelines that the community itself put in place. No one here cares how you (or anyone) feels about anything, or what handwavy "science" you believe supports any claims. Content must be supported by what we call "reliable sources" (a technical term here in WP - defined in WP:MEDRS for content about health, and by WP:RS for everything else) and sources and content that summarizes sources, must be used per the key content policies, WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NPOV. Coming here and shouting and trying to force changes will get you no where; it will get you blocked. Reasoning with other editors, based on reliable sources and the policies and guidelines, can sometimes yield change. If you really want to change this content, you will need to first spend time to learn how this place works. Jytdog (talk) 23:45, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Using talk pages[edit]

Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages (like this one), which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon ":" in front of your comment, and the WP software converts that into an indent; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons "::" which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages. That is how we know who said what. I know this is insanely archaic and unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Jytdog (talk) 23:40, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]