User talk:75.83.171.237: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:55, 8 November 2007

June 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Alaska, was not constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Yksin 00:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

October 2007

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. If you continue to re-add the links, you may be blocked. Thank you. Dyanega 06:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Here are some other hints and tips:

I would recommend that you get a username. You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and there are many benefits of having a username. (If you edit without a username, your IP address is used to identify you instead.)
When using talk pages, please sign your name at the end of your messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username (or IP address) and the date.

If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or type {{helpme}} on this talk page and a user will help you as soon as possible. I will answer your questions as far as I can. Again, welcome, and I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 02:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

November 2007

This is your last warning. You have been warned repeatedly on other accounts, and blocked repeatedly on other accounts. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Morgellons, you will be blocked from editing on this account, as well. Dyanega 03:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to [[Template:Highssp]] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.Template:Do not delete

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for Sock puppetry. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

— Arthur Rubin | (talk) 09:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|FYI, user Fyslee and later Yamla removed my unblock request from http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:75.83.171.237&redirect=no http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:75.83.171.237&action=history

23:42, 7 November 2007 75.83.171.237 (Talk) (9,339 bytes) (Yamla removed my unblock request. After complaint Fyslee did the same.)
21:43, 7 November 2007 Yamla (Talk | contribs) m (5,067 bytes) (Reverted edits by 75.83.171.237 (talk) to last version by Fyslee)
21:04, 7 November 2007 75.83.171.237 (Talk) (9,339 bytes)
20:26, 7 November 2007 75.83.171.237 (Talk) (7,383 bytes) (Fyslee removed an unblock request. Totally inappopriate, except he's implicated in the unblock request and covering up his complicity in violating NPOV across multiple wikipedia articles

It is totally imappropriate (and hopefully not in accordance w/ wikipedia rules) for Fyslee to delete an unblock request before it even gets heard or processed.

That's why I'm sending email too. Because user:Arthur Rubin, user:Dyanega and user:Fyslee won't be able to delete and censor mail like they're deleting and censoring my input on the Morgellons discussion page, as well as my talk page.

I'm going to keep at it until this issue gets resolved. I'm also going to get the entire Morgellons community involved in this outrage. Wikipedia is being abused by these quackwatch sponsored creeps who are conspiring to violate NPOV on a variety of articles: Lyme, Morgellons, Herbalism, Naturopathy, Chiropractic, Hulda Clark, Barrett vs. Rosenthal, etc.

This kind of censorship and "hostile takeover" of wikipedia artticles on health truly diminishes the value of wikipedia. It is espeially egregious when you consider that Barrett and Quackwatch are big-pharma and HMO funded and are actively seeking to suppress information regarding both medical malpractice/misdiagnosis by the mainstream. They also seek to limit treatment for emerging diseases and epidemics (Morgellons and Lyme) because proper treatment will result in huge financial losses for the insurance/HMO/AMA industries for which quackwatch is racketeering.

-- Niels. http://nielsmayer.com ................

Subject: Re: why are wikipedia's Arthur Rubin and Fyslee and Thatcher131 attacking people complaining about medical malpractice and misdiagnosis. From: Ilena Rosenthal

Thanks for writing ... I totally understand what you are going thru.

Stephen Barrettt has a professional team like Ron Zeno and Rubin and Paul fyslee Lee and AVB who control Wiki ... many of them worked usenet before and I know them from there.

Do you know Levine and dematt? They might be able to help.

The info on Barrett Vs Rosenthal and on Barrett´s page about the case he lost to me is factually wrong but they have managed to bully off the facts.

I´ll be back at my computer today ...

All the best, Ilena

http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/ http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/barrettvsrosenthal.htm

Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:48:48 -0800 Subject: Re: censorship on wikipedia morgellons discussion page

Some users that have deleted and censored my posts, other than Margellons ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3AHerd_of_Swine ) are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3AFyslee and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk%3AThatcher131 .

It is interesting that Thatcher131, Fyslee and Arthur Rubin have also conspired to censor and ban Ilena Rosenthal( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3AIlena ) -- Rosenthal appears to be a champion of raising awareness of the dangers of silicone breast implants -- http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/ -- . and apparently, Fyslee/Rubin don't like those kind of warnings.

Similarly, they are spending plenty of energy trash-talking Hulda Clark ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulda_Regehr_Clark ). Hulda is a naturopath that has raised awareness of parasitic issues in the united states. Again, Fyslee/Rubin don't like people warning about the health effects of parasites.

And apparently, Fyslee/Rubin are also attempting to suppress information on Morgellons.

I'd really like to know why they're spending so much time fighting to keep the status quo of mainstream medicine.... fighting to ignore parasites, fighting to have people concerned w/ parasites DOP'd, fighting to ignore the fact that precious medical resources in this country (and significant danger caused for patients) for totally useless, dangerous, vanity-oriented cosmetic surgery.}

To answer a few of your questions

Even though I suspect this won't help, I'd actually like to address a few of your questions, mostly because the simple fact that you are asking them shows that you have COMPLETELY MISSED why you are being blocked, and what editors such as myself are trying to accomplish. It has NOTHING to do with mainstream medicine, NOTHING to do with parasites, and - frankly - NOTHING to do with whether anything you are saying is true or not. The reason you're being blocked is because you have egregiously and UNAPOLOGETICALLY violated nearly every single rule that editors in Wikipedia are expected to follow. You CANNOT break all of WP's rules and then expect anyone to ever allow you to post another word here, regardless of whether the words you wish to post are true. If you're scratching your head as to how I could possibly be serious about that, there's one passage in WP:FRINGE which sums it up:

Wikipedia is not a forum for presenting new ideas, for countering any systemic bias in institutions such as academia, or for otherwise promoting ideas which have failed to merit attention elsewhere. Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs.

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter to me or anyone here whether you're correct or not - what matters is that you CANNOT go about using and abusing Wikipedia the WAY you have chosen to go about it. If you cannot contribute to Wikipedia within the rules that have been set forth, in good faith, then you cannot contribute to Wikipedia. PERIOD. Dyanega 06:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

so in other words, this isn't about creating a repository of knowledge that is factually correct as one would expect in an enclyclopedia. This is about obeying your completely artificial wiki-world and following your artificial wiki rules -- content be damned. Those rules are irrelevant when we're dealing with slander, libel, hate speech and lies. Just ask any judge in a court of law. You're thinking of yourselves and yourselves only... which is totally incorrect for any author to do. Authors must think of the audience of their words, the impact of their words. This encyclopedia is not being written for you, it is being written for everybody. You've lost sight of that because you can't see the forest for the WP:trees.

It's also interesting that you seem to think it's ethical that because I violated your rules of deleting things from my talk page (it's my talk page, why shouldn't i be able to delete things?) that somehow ustifies deleting my unblock request? So I guess the WP:rules don't really need to be followed, since you're clearly breaking them yourselves. Does that mean, If I find the article is slanderous libelous hate speech, I am entitled to break the rules too? I expect such "you did it so I'm going to do it" logic from my 11 year old son... not from people pretending to hold some kind of moral high ground for their actions.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy your argument. Why is it ok for Arthur Rubin to arbitrarily delete sections I've added to the talk page and move them off to somewhere where they won't be seen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Morgellons/Nielsp What's going on has nothing to do with rules or civility. What's going on is a cabal of people conspiring to make the Morgellons page biased towards DOP (which is old incorrect news) and ignoring new IMPORTANT information that I've attemted to introduce, such as http://nielsmayer.com/roller/NielsMayer/entry/morgellons_discovery_cure http://nielsmayer.com/roller/NielsMayer/entry/morgellons_epidemiology_california ... These were deleted on the most specious of claims. Meanwhile, it's perfectly ok to have links to http://MorgellonsWatch.com . But that's because your "cabal" (Arthur Rubin, Fyslee, yourself, Thatcher131) want to suppress opposing information. That is by definition not NPOV and the bias is evident by anybody that reads the screed that comprises the current wikipedia morgellons page.75.83.171.237 09:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]