User talk:Eric Yarnell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 15 Seattle meetup[edit]

Just wanted to let you know we are planning another Seattle meetup on January 15, 2005. We're trying to get a sense of who will attend, so please drop by that page & leave a note. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:23, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

User categorization[edit]

Greetings, Eric Yarnell! Please accept this message as an invitation to categorize your user page in the category Category:Wikipedians in Washington and removing your name from the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Washington page. The page will be deleted when all users have been removed. Even if you do not wish to be placed in a category, could you take a moment to remove your name from the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Washington page? Thanks!!

To add your name to the category, please use the tag [[Category:Wikipedians in Washington|Eric Yarnell]] to ensure proper sorting.

For more information, please see Wikipedia:User categorisation and Category:Wikipedians by location. -- Roby Wayne Talk • Hist 04:30, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kathy Abascal[edit]

A tag has been placed on Kathy Abascal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. mhking (talk) 16:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Kathy Abascal[edit]

Hi there Eric Yarnell! I saw that you added a {{hangon}} tag to a page which you created, Kathy Abascal. This is good, but in the process you removed the tag requesting deletion under CSD A7. Even though there is a hangon on the page, the deletion template should remain there. But don't worry, this doesn't mean that the page is going to get deleted. Make sure you edit the talk page of the page nominated for deletion, located at Talk:Kathy Abascal, administrators will look at your reason why the page should remain before they decide what to do. Thanks - SDPatrolBot (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Please use high quality references per WP:MEDRS such as review articles or major textbooks. Thanks and welcome to Wikipedia.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why not incorporate the information you want to include from this review[1]? Biosthmors (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kathy Abascal[edit]

The article Kathy Abascal has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable enough for an article by the criteria of WP:PROF

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 06:14, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review invitation[edit]

Hello,

I am editor-in-chief of a project in development in Wikiversity called Wikiversity Journal of Medicine (more information at Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/About).

Considering your expertise in both medicine and publishing, I'd very much appreciate if you did a peer review of an article that was recently submitted to this journal:

This is essentially a shortened version of the Wikipedia article on that subject, in own words. It encourages the creation of similar summaries intended for introductions to other articles as well.

The peer review is preferably written in the corresponding talk page, and should include a declaration of any conflicts of interests. Comments should be constructive, include both strengths and areas for improvement, and be referenced whenever possible. Otherwise, the journal has no strict rules regarding the structure and length of a peer review. Still, more guidelines for peer reviewers can be found at: Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/Peer reviewers.

We prefer peer reviews to be returned within 3 weeks, and appreciate in any case a reply regarding whether you are interested or not in this contribution.

Best regards,

Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:17, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BastyrUnivSeal.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BastyrUnivSeal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Information icon Hello, Eric Yarnell. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Bastyr University, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

  • avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
  • instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
  • avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Delta13C (talk) 13:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dear Eric, I have added a COI template to the talk page of Bastyr University that specified you have a COI. It would have been nice you had done this yourself, since the COI notice I added here to your talk page was made over three weeks ago. Please be mindful of the COI guidelines. Happy editing! Delta13C (talk) 06:38, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry Delta13C. I am not on Wikipedia that often so didn't see your note. I was not familiar with the COI policy so didn't know how to make such an indication. You are correct and I am chagrined. It won't happen again. It is just frustrating that the Bastyr University page is so very poorly done and lacks correct information. I do want to say that the edits I made really had nothing to do with me or my position in the university and that they were entirely factual and correctly cited. Nevertheless I was wrong.
  • You are welcome to point out the problems you see on the article's talk page, where you can engage others who work on the article. Delta13C (talk) 18:15, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • EDIT: I forgot to mention that you can read this: Template:UserboxCOI, which will instruct you how to self-identify as having a COI. Delta13C (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Belfield has been accepted[edit]

William Belfield, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 21:33, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, an open access peer reviewed journal with no charges, invites you to participate[edit]

Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal.

We welcome you to have a look the journal. Feel free to participate.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reach@wikiversityjournal.org email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

DiptanshuTalk 13:50, 11 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.[reply]

September 2018[edit]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Withania somnifera, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. JACM is a journal with dubious alt med content. It is widely viewed as spam. Please review WP:MEDRS and the quality of sources defined in WP:MEDASSESS. Zefr (talk) 16:08, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Characterizing a medical journal as "spam" to me reveals your bias. This journal is not "spam." Further, you do not cite any references to support your contention that it is "widely viewed" as "spam", which is of course defined as sending of unwanted electronic messages. JACM does not engage in spam and I don't think anyone views it as "spam." There may be those who view it as biased. However, you have also contributed to the impossible Catch-22 situation for those who wish to study so-called "alternative" medicine. We are supposed to study it, but if we do publish our results, it is viewed as "dubious." Because for a while many journals would simply not accept such research out of their own bias against "alternative" medicine, people within this world set up their own journals such as JACM. But doing so is viewed as dubious. So there is no way to do research on "alternative" medicine or have journals that focus on this content without being dubious. Finally, citing self-appointed experts who criticize "alternative" medicine, particularly one critiquing a single possibly flawed article within this journal, does not seem to be a very strong basis for condemning an entire publication. Again, many conventional medical journals (most notably perhaps the Lancet's publication of the now retracted paper on MMR supposedly causing autism, which arguably created a massive wave of anti-vaccine sentiment that has harmed many children who weren't vaccinated and which has cost hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on studies to refute the fraudulent claims in the paper they published) have published really damaging articles. Why should they not be viewed as dubious alt med content providers and not reliable sources?

Because JACM historically and routinely publishes articles of low- to non-credible quality which objectively is pseudoscience and with an impact factor of 1.5, unacceptable for medical content in an encyclopedia. Please follow WP:MEDRS in your editing for Wikipedia. You can state your case, if you wish, at WT:MED. --Zefr (talk) 19:57, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Impact factors have been criticized on many grounds (example http://www.texilajournal.com/blog/journal-impact-factor/; https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/09/11/062109). The BMJ-published journals Injury Prevention, the Journal of Medical Ethics, the Postgraduate Medical Journal, and Acupuncture in Medicine all have similar or lower impact factors as JACM (https://www.bmj.com/company/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/ACFrOgDrdntVOujQdl1AYznplKGJBMzsCWMO8_3rlFk__0oe2ra6usZiahxOyXizeTFlzoVBP3i5Hr3TlUGcgi5uLkYlFcLqFc9iil_8QDqc2KPCw5TxeTSNM11J70E.pdf) I will discuss further at the page you recommend.

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Information icon Hello, Eric Yarnell. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page [[Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine]], you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

  • avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
  • propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
  • avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

No one has ever paid me in any way, shape, or form to edit Wikipedia.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. As someone with a financial stake in CAM products and CAM publications, you have a conflict of interest here. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:57, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have no financial stake in JACM. If you wish to see my 1% ownership stake in Wild Brilliance Press, a publisher of some textbooks in the field of natural medicine, as a COI for editing about JACM then there you have it. My ownership stake in Heron Botanicals is already disclosed and long has been on my user page. I do not see how that is relevant to JACM. You are right I should have acknowledged that on my edit of the Withania page, but it came up as an incidental issue and nothing planned, and I really don't think about my company when doing such editing I think as an expert in clinical herbal medicine.

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Eric Yarnell. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Alexbrn. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Alexbrn (talk) 17:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mosannona depressa has been accepted[edit]

Mosannona depressa, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Dan arndt (talk) 08:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ligusticum porteri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pima (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Bacopa monnieri 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.
Stop warring. There is no consensus to change the sourced content; WP:CON. Zefr (talk) 18:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Rather than just rule lawyering and hiding behind a "good reference," address the content of my comments! You do not appear to have knowledge or understanding of the law and regulations the regulate dietary supplements in the US. The actions taken by the FDA against dietary supplement companies are about the fact that it is illegal to make drug claims about dietary supplements in the US without going through a regulatory process. The letters you reference are about the failure of these companies to go through this process. The FDA is not making a judgement that bacopa has no activity or is fraudulent as you seem to be implying. Rather, they are just telling companies to stop making claims that they haven't justified. This is not material that is relevant to an encyclopedic entry on bacopa.

For comparison, the FDA has issued warning letters to pharmaceutical companies about drugs they make for all kinds of various issues (manufacturing problems, illegal marketing, illegal drug claims, etc.). There is no reason Wikipedia should cite these letters related to the drug itself. This doesn't mean the drug has some inherent problem. The letters should be cited at best in a Wikipedia article about the companies in question to show potential problems with that company. But of course there are no Wikipedia articles about drugs citing such regulatory letters because that doesn't make any sense!Eric Yarnell (talk) 18:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eric_Yarnell&oldid=1168886025"