Hi there Martin.uecker! I saw that the thread you made on the dispute resolution noticeboard got closed. You shouldn't take this personally, as it is one of the rules of the noticeboard that we don't allow disputes there that haven't received significant discussion on a talk page. The thing to do now is create a new discussion on Talk:Magnetic resonance imaging, and make a case for the content you wish to add, and we can take things from there. If you have any questions about this, or about editing Wikipedia in general, then I'll be happy to answer them either here or on my talk page.
It's a shame that your first experiences with Wikipedia haven't been as positive as they could be, but once you have got the hang of how this place operates I think you will have a lot less problems. You are right that the conflict of interest guidelines make specific allowances for scientists, so I think there is actually a lot we can do here. It seems to me that an expert in MRI imaging would be a great plus to this project, and that you are exactly the kind of editor we need at Wikipedia; so, if there is anything I can do to help, just ask. All the best. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:23, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- One more thing - when you are discussing material that another editor has reverted, it is usually more helpful to do it on the article's talk page rather than the talk page of the user who did the reverting. This way, all the editors involved in the article can see the discussion, allowing the group to come to a consensus on whether to include the material or not, and how it should be presented. (If you feel like doing some reading on this, I recommend Wikipedia's policy on consensus and the essay on the bold, revert, discuss cycle.) — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 06:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Martin, I am writing in response to your addition of spam criticism to the ResearchGate article. I do not agree that the sources being cited for this criticism are credible by Wiki standards. Because there has been some back and forth on this issue over the past few months, I am asking the Wikipedia dispute resolution noticeboard for guidance. Thank you. JNorman704 (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- I could not find any thread on the dispute resolution board. Please discuss this on the Talk page of the article first. Martin.uecker (talk)
Thank you for the effort you've put into saving the ResearchGate article (though it was in wain, it seems). It is so sad to see a handful of editors (dominated by JNorman704) twist an article so far in the direction of a commercial company at the expense of its victims. Amaurea (talk) 23:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. It is sad to see how wikipedia degenerates into a pile of marketing junk. JNorman704 was obviously paid for this. Martin.uecker (talk) 22:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "ResearchGate".