User talk:Bodhi Peace

A barnstar for thee!

		The Redirect Barnstar
		Your diligent work in the area of redirect categorization and improvement is duly recognized and greatly appreciated. You are truly one of the unsung heroes of Wikipedia, and we hope you continue to enjoy your improvement of this awesome encyclopedia! The Duke of NonsenseWhat is necessary for thee? 18:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bodhi. Thank you for your activity at WP:AFC/R. Whilst a lot of your requests get declined or don't survive AFD. The one that do are some useful ones. Have a nice day. The Duke of Nonsense^{What is necessary for thee?} 18:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Carob

You said: "What is the reason carob is a health food and a healthy alternative to chocolate if not for the fact that it doesn't contain caffeine or theobromine? Those are the only unhealthy compounds in chocolate?"

What reliable source says carob is nutritious, or for that matter, describes any of its components quantitatively in relation to the Daily Value? There is no evidence caffeine in small quantities is "unhealthy". --Zefr (talk) 23:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Not many people eat carob compared to chocolate. It was marketed heavily as a health food and chocolate was thought to be unhealthy to my knowledge during the 1970s back-to-the-land health food movement. Caffeine is safe in low levels but it is not nutritious and therefore in would be the thing that makes chocolate unhealthy. We know chocolate is healthy in small amounts, just like red wine, although they contain caffeine or alcohol... ARTICLE: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-gastronomy/how-carob-traumatized-a-generation @Zefr: Bod (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

You rely too much on lay press and marketing hype. Read WP:MEDRS and select better sources. --Zefr (talk) 23:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

The 1st paragraph in the Carob article says that Carob powder and Carob bars were available in health food stores to replace cocoa powder and chocolate bars. The unanswered question is "why?" Bod (talk) 00:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Chocolate, you may be blocked from editing. You continue to insert your opinion into articles. You don't use WP:MEDRS sources. Please stop yourself and check for strong peer-reviewed sources as needed for an encyclopedia. Zefr (talk) 14:41, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Chocolate

You said: I'm just wondering what your stance is that you are trying to cover up the stimulating effects of chocolate. Have you heard of "crackao", the nickname given to cacao by some raw foodists who get their energy from chocolate and basically become dependent on it? Some types of chocolate definitely contain stimulating compounds that will have an effect to someone who has not adjusted to a daily caffeine dose in the form of coffee, tea, etc. (https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=200530) Do you have a particular fondness for chocolate?

You are susceptible and gullible to food trends and spam websites. Your comment about "stimulating compounds" is baseless without knowing intake doses. You're being a nuisance trying to put your personal experiences or impressions into an encyclopedia when you know -- having been told several times -- that an encyclopedia should be the best available facts supported by high-quality sources described in WP:MEDRS, which apparently you choose to ignore. Your efforts could easily be converted into quality edits if you check yourself before making changes, and ask: is this statement based on a strong peer-reviewed source? --Zefr (talk) 23:38, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I hear you. If you google "caffeine in..." :

• 2 ounce serving of dark chocolate : 24 mg
• cup of green tea : 35 mg
• cup of coffee : 95 mg

It's not impossible for even a single serving to have an effect. Bod (talk) 23:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Find a systematic review that uses actual data to state such a conclusion. That's my point: you're not the first person to wonder about this, but it depends on dose, which leads to a pointless argument to suggest "stimulation" without actual high-quality literature discussing it. Your unsupported entries on this topic, Ceratonia siliqua, and others are better suited to blog discussions rather than an encyclopedia where people come looking for strongly supported facts. --Zefr (talk) 23:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

/* Communique */

Hi Bodhi

    Consider adding the concept that carob makes a 'healthy' alternative to chocolate in doggie treats, it being free from deadly theobromine.
    Consider how to present Coney-Island/chili-dog (or a link to such) in the hot-dog piece.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mouselb (talk • contribs) 18:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC) 

Hi Mouse @Mouselb: The carob article does say that already Ceratonia_siliqua#For_animals. And I don't know about the Coney-Island chili dog but my father grew up in that area so I can ask him. Bod (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Chocolate. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Also warning per WP:3RR. Please stop yourself, and find a review. Zefr (talk) 20:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bodhi Peace: the danger of chocolate to some pet animals is, I believe, an important point to add to Chocolate, but, as Zefr says, it must be reliably sourced. Review articles like this one are ideal. A good way forward is often to use Google Scholar to search. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:40, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Single quotes for gloss

Thanks for your recent edits to Lasagne. I can't remember the last time I saw bold edits to that page that were actually constructive. One bitty note for improvement: in a somewhat recent expansion of MOS:SINGLE (last 2 years, I think), simple glosses now get single quotation marks instead of doubles. Thanks again for your work, and happy editing! Ibadibam (talk) 21:29, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that's exciting to learn something new! Bod (talk) 21:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

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

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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. Alexbrn (talk) 18:26, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Advertising

Knock it the hell off.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising. Jytdog (talk) 19:59, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I am filing to have you indefinitely blocked. You are harming Wikipedia and making other people waste time cleaning up the dog shit you are leaving on the sidewalk of Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Alright, I just like new products. I won't put images of them on wikipedia if that is not the place for them. I just thought it would help the article to have an image of a bottle sold commercially. Bod (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Look, Lemonade#Varieties has brand name image. Is that against policy? Bod (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Look, you are not even trying to follow MEDRS or think carefully about what we do here. You are the guy who leaves dog shit on the sidewalk. You are that guy. Jytdog (talk) 20:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

You are right. I apologize. I'll take a 1 day break and think about what wikipedia is for. But do you approve of that bottled lemonade image? Bod (talk) 20:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

OK, I read WP:PROMO. I'll take a break and work on not promoting a certain opinion, which I do realize I have been trying to change some people's viewpoints on things related to the popularity of certain foods and products. Bod (talk) 20:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Jytdog (talk) 01:57, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Guy (Help!) 07:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

There are two reasons for this block.

• You are subject to an editing restriction [1], but your contributions show that you have consistently violated it.
• This ANI thread showing persistent addition of advertorial into articles.

Any unblock will be conditional on the editing restriction being respected and a topic ban from food, nutrition and health, broadly construed. Guy (Help!) 08:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit Request

@JzG: Can you please clear all content on my user page, and can you please move all current text on my talk page to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bodhi_Peace/Archive_3 ? Thank you. Bod (talk) 00:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)