503:"other side" of the Juice Plus arguement continually brings up, only to have shot down and NEVER included in the article, is that there are many, dozens, if not more of "secondary sources" that have written about Juice Plus and favorably so. RIR continues to source MLMwatch which negatively talks about EVERY "MLM" marketing company, ignores that Juice Plus is not a traditional MLM but a franchise opportunity that only costs $ 50 to start and NO inventory is EVER required to be stocked by a distributor, you don't make ANY money for signing up a distributor aka BodyWise which charges $ 750 to sign up and the person "upline" gets $ 350 of that money. Leading doctors throughout the world recommend it to their patients, renown institutions have studied it and backed it. It amazes me that RIR is allowed to control the content and run the negative tone as he/she deems, and editors with much more history of other articles and neutrality stand by and let it happen. Why not call NSA, ask for Dr. Carlos Madera or Dr. Enita Brody (email me julai at juliahavey dot com for their number) and find out first hand from the company about some of the non-negative secondary sources, such as Isadore Rosenfeld, more perhaps even more importanly the "first sources" such as the people who conducted research--rather than Stephen Barrett and MLM and noname nutritionists from small town newspapers? This article really doesn't make Wiki look like the unimpeachable source that it was intended to be. Respectfully, Julia Havey
658:, I believe that the videos must remain off the page until the vote because Dilip rajeev/white_adept added the videos without a discussion on the talk page. In fact, he added some 40k bytes of information to the page (most of it high controversial and in need of discussion) in a very short period. It is my opinion that the videos should have not been left on the page to begin with, but any attempts to remove the info until discussion was almost always reverted by white_adept. Thanks,
863:
593:
512:
purpose and both accounts start editing and end editing at the same time and seem a bit tag teamish. Second account was created right after discussion of "consensus" was brought forward and the statements of both accounts are being used as if they form a "consensus." It could also be meat puppetry I suppose. Or just total coincidence. I am just curious about whether you see the same pattern I do and what you think of it?
548:
flummery is a field in and of itself. Knowing when you need to enlist the help of an expert, and knowing what the expert is actually able to do, instead of assuming that 'expert ~= god' - that is a skill that many people lack. I suspect that Randi knows more about most scientific fields than many experts know about scientific fields outside their expertise. Bhimaji (talk) 00:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
798:
138:
I've been working on understanding
Knowledge (XXG) policies and have been trying to ensure that any edits I do have been both fully COI-disclosed and properly NPOV. I've also talked to all the MDSA people that have been doing edits. I'm not the boss so I can't order them, but I thought that there was
949:
You stated that there was no investigation during the trial. If there were no investigation then why do you think the case was dismissed as 'with prejudice' meaning it cannot be filed again for the same claims? Otherwise the case should have closed 'With out
Prejudice' meaning it can be filed again.
551:
So according to you, it's enough to only "suspect" his scientifc knowledge to make disappear any kind of information related to his educational background ?! I mean, is this the way wikipedia works ? you "suspect", how sure is that?! why didn't you even "wonder", that would have been a better reason
474:
You recently undid my removal of the Swatch section in the RoHS article. Let me explain -- I did not remove it based on opinion, but rather fact. I obtained the EU paperwork officially filed by Swatch and the EU's consultant recommendation to deny Swatch's request for an exemption. So based on these
502:
You wrote: RiR is claiming, ... the secondary sources that have written about Juice Plus have focused prominently on these issues Those statements are, in my opinion, consistent. If RiR's assertion is correct, then the article's POV is reasonable. Bhimaji (talk) 06:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC) What the
547:
His IP is French, so, yeah, I won't hold his
English skills against him. His personality, and his intellectual abilities, however, are things that I will hold against him. Back on topic, though, it is a common mistake that people make. People fail to understand that finding out the cause of
511:
I do not want to make any accusations too overtly so am being a bit cryptic let me know if I am being too cryptic. The editing pattern of two users on an article and talk page that you and I are both currently involved in seems suspiciously like sock puppetry to me. The newest account seems single
283:
Everything is well explained at the talk pages
Bhimaji. There's a new situation now and also because of two reasons: Everybody has been informed by the situation at the ANI lately and the revert happened today and not 3 days ago. The problem itself was the fact of removing a request (there weren't
774:
I'm really having a hard time understanding what the person is saying. S/He really isn't making sense to me, and my attempts to comprehend what he is saying have not worked. I'm going to leave the discussion to you, as I've gotten a big headache out of the discussion. Overall, though, I think you
743:
Please lend your attention to the Julia Havey article. Rhode Island Red has done a hatchett job on the article already edited and approved by numerous editors. He says sources aren't able to be found confirming her two Oprah & Friends XM appearances, when they are clearly and easily found on
118:
I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for being reasonable. Its far too often the case with COI editors that they get unreasonable, uncivil and even a bit manic in their arguments and editing. You have done great in remaining civil and reasonable, made honest efforts to improve the MDSA
943:
They telecasted 'Alaya Rahm' allegations. During the real trial in 2006 'Alaya Rahm' who had made those allegation claims to BBC self dismissed his own case in the middle of the trial. Again it only proves that BBC just reported 'Alaya Rahm' allegations. They did not confirm or verify
700:
I'm not entirely sure what it means either lol. I assumed he calls me it because I have been somewhat of a discussion moderator, trying to reach equal grounds with the multiple editors of the page. Of course, it has no meaning on
Knowledge (XXG), but it doesn't bother me :P. Thanks,
653:
The discussions initially were on the sai baba talk page. However, they were carried over to a user talk page after the four editors involved saw the discussion on said talk page. I do agree that it isnt appropriate, and I am more than willing to have another call on them.
482:
Do you still think this content should remain? I'm willing to rewrite it and explain - perhaps that would be better than just deleting it, however if it's inaccurate or in dispute, it shouldn't be there in my opinion. Please see the RoHS discussion page for more detail.
204:
slip up in neutrality in a court-case article on
Knowledge (XXG) for an active case-in-progress could potentially be noticed by the courts and/or their parties, and this could potentially cause real-world harm, not just harm to Knowledge (XXG). Because of this, we
199:
If you are involved in a court case, or close to one of the litigants, you would find it very hard to demonstrate that what you wrote about a party or a law firm associated with the case, or a related area of law, was entirely objective. Even a
560:
As it was, the tenses were inconsistent -- most were in past tense but a few were in present tense, so I changed the latter to past tense. If you want to change all of them to present tense, feel free. As long as they're all consistent. --
237:
Please look more carefully at the logs and edit history. The refactored comment was one that this person posted, but when connected to the wrong network. He changed the posting IP because he wanted to avoid confusion. If you look here:
359:. XMonad has again been nominated for deletion; as you previously edited, I thought you would like to know. (I have also contacted all the other non-anon editors.) If you no longer care, please feel free to ignore this. Thanks. --
119:
article, avoid personal attacks and be completely honest about your affiliations. Even though I may not nessisarily agree with your assertation of notability, I do think you deserve praise for your attitude and efforts.
142:
Obviously, from your comments, I see that you are still concerned about some of the edits by myself or my co-workers. Do you think you could make some suggestions or identify article edits you feel are inappropriate?
679:
against the rules. The article more than adequately covers the claims that the miracles are faked in text, so adding the videos serves no real purpose other than to push a POV, which the article already has. Thanks,
747:
he has a clear bias / vendetta against her because she edited the Juice Plus article YEARS ago. He edits science articles and Julia Havey? Knowledge (XXG) is not the forum for a personal fued or vendetta, is it?
1033:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
478:
I am never eager to remove content, and I left an explanation with Aki, who originally added it. I have also sent an email to the UK Guardian which was cited as a reference, asking about their possible mistake.
906:
Especially the following statement "That reputable media agencies and independent journalists have not been able to confirm a single instance of sexual abuse linked to Sathya Sai Baba or his organisations"
812:
and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
134:"Blocking Jeanclauduc indef would not fix the problem as we have the COI stuff going on here w/ employees of a company are editing many related topics.-- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 12:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)"
274:
Thanks. I appreciate your willingness to admit to mistakes. I must admit, however, that I am still confused about a 3 day block for an 11 day old transgression that was warned about and not repeated.
241:
you can see that he has signed his comments with his primary IP when he's been using his other IP address. I've suggested to him that he would be better off registering, but I can't force him to.
284:
warning) from his talk page w/o explaining to folks why he's changed IP numbers. Co-editors have the right to know but instead of knowing they have been reverted. So that is the main reason. --
775:
present a very good argument for leaving the word, and explaining your reasoning (which I happen to agree with :P) in a understandable way. Just thought I'd say good work! Thanks,
995:
552:
for making disappear my contribution about his educational career don't you think ?! I can't believe guys like you run wikipedia like kings of the info.. simply pitious.
940:
Obviously BBC did not confirm anything. If they had confirmed they wouldn't have allowed absurd statements such as 'Sathya Sai Baba is a Mafia Man' in their show.
994:
Because you are an editor who has participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or a closely related one), I call your attention to discussion at
617:
599:
592:
244:
Given that the offense happened 11 days ago, I'm surprised that the block is happening now, and is for 73 hours, as opposed to the block of 31 hours for
61:
527:
Thanks for taking a look, so far it is nothing really actionable one way or another just nice to have a reality check for ones paranoia sometimes :).
352:
89:
We sue you we sue
Knowledge (XXG) we sue WizardofWar for LIES LIES. MDSI has now France lawsuits against Wizard, X, Bhimaji, Kirkpatrick and RONZ.
31:
to
Knowledge (XXG)! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that will get you started:
64:
on talk pages using three (~~~) or four tildes (~~~~), which will leave a link to other users so they can reach you. If you need help, check out
613:
1058:
755:
876:
634:
Hi, Could you kindly look into the page on Sathya Sai Baba and help counter continuous blanking of content and vandalism on the page?
606:
105:
1054:
258:
I'll be unblocking him even if it would not make any sense. He is obliged to get registered now as all pages are locked. --
181:
articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
1045:
describes the
Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
188:
50:
1050:
363:
621:
964:
of course there was no investigation during the trial. ~I am not a legal expert, so I cannot answer that question.
35:
28:
57:
759:
215:
So that is my main concern and i am talking about all editors in direct relation w/ the subjects on hand. --
955:
915:
887:
869:
862:
852:
245:
751:
639:
572:
93:
729:
488:
69:
1046:
65:
1003:
382:
101:
809:
725:
484:
45:
821:}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{
635:
97:
566:
532:
517:
1022:
1013:
390:
166:
Knowledge (XXG) is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit," but if you have a conflict of interest
1042:
1026:
951:
911:
883:
848:
333:
292:
266:
223:
248:, who has written extremely distasteful and insulting material. Can you explain your reasoning?
924:
What is meant by 'confirm'? The BBC felt they had enough confirmation to make the allegations.
969:
457:
80:
1038:
1030:
675:
I take it you didnt read my or
Radiantenergy's responses. Using the videos to push an agenda
322:
156:
Hi Bhimaji. Your efforts are much appreciated. I have one major concern and it is related to
999:
901:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Sathya_Sai_Baba&diff=321305577&oldid=321287312
1041:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
1034:
386:
157:
818:
562:
528:
513:
360:
417:
822:
776:
702:
681:
659:
475:
documents and Dr. Fischer at DFR Solutions - I removed the section as being incorrect.
120:
440:
437:
434:
431:
428:
425:
409:
406:
403:
400:
397:
394:
326:
285:
259:
216:
40:
965:
925:
453:
275:
249:
147:
835:
Bhimaji, I noticed that you had removed this from the Sathya Sai Baba article -
797:
367:
452:
You might want to glance at my user page about my interests in New Thought.
319:
he clearly says he is. I wonder if he'd be willing to PGP sign his posts :)
420:. Can you write about this thing? My English is worse than writing there
722:
1029:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)
76:
after the question on your talk page. Thank you and we hope you stay!
805:
356:
1062:
1007:
973:
959:
933:
919:
891:
856:
786:
763:
733:
712:
691:
669:
643:
576:
536:
521:
492:
461:
336:
295:
278:
269:
252:
226:
150:
123:
191:
about articles related to your organization or its competitors...
370:
879:
at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
861:
796:
630:
Request help in countering vandalism on Sathya Sai Baba Page
609:
at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
591:
721:
Could you please share your perspective in this discussion:
160:. If we read through the policy we'd find the following:
996:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Rhode Island Red.2
900:
842:
836:
316:
313:
239:
770:
Controversial in the opening paragraph of the SSB page
325:. I believe the problem of IPs is sorted out now. --
308:
Note that this IP address has previously claimed to
910:The above statement is not an opinion its a fact.
1021:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
351:Hi: you previously contributed to/edited the 1st
416:Great view, let's talk with Wikipedians in the
385:about this mistake. Remember that we are in an
197:
164:
15:
8:
600:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry's talk page
817:Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{
868:Hello, Bhimaji. You have new messages at
598:Hello, Bhimaji. You have new messages at
209:editing when this type of conflict exists.
56:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
381:Not really, but I have added a comment
72:, or ask your question and then place
543:the "amazing" not so scientific randi
7:
36:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)
556:Tenses in Wireless Energy Transfer
233:Your recent block of 76.109.17.236
14:
1047:review the candidates' statements
841:You had also removed this here -
614:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
1053:. For the Election committee,
1023:Arbitration Committee election
1014:ArbCom elections are now open!
1:
1063:16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
974:13:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
899:Why did you remove this here
1008:16:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
960:02:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
934:02:25, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
920:01:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
622:03:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
577:00:01, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
129:Advice on improving my edits
1049:and submit your choices on
892:22:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
857:02:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
537:21:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
522:20:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
22:Welcome to Knowledge (XXG)!
1078:
1055:MediaWiki message delivery
804:Onopearls has given you a
493:20:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
412:10:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
870:Radiantenergy's talk page
787:05:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
764:23:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
734:19:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
713:19:44, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
692:02:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
670:01:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
644:07:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
462:16:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
443:15:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
66:Knowledge (XXG):Questions
18:
929:
448:Thanks for the comments.
337:16:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
312:be Jean Claude Ducasse:
296:22:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
279:22:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
270:22:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
253:20:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
227:13:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
151:13:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
393:when edit. Thank you!--
246:User_talk:83.206.63.250
124:03:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
866:
801:
596:
211:
194:
172:exercise great caution
1027:Arbitration Committee
865:
800:
595:
575:comment was added at
189:deletion discussions
27:Hello, Bhimaji, and
1031:arbitration process
207:strongly discourage
1043:arbitration policy
877:remove this notice
867:
808:! Cookies promote
802:
607:remove this notice
597:
212:
195:
139:good improvement.
25:
792:A delicious treat
754:comment added by
744:Oprah's website!
387:open encyclopedia
335:
294:
268:
225:
196:
163:
110:
96:comment added by
87:
86:
79:This was sent by
19:
1069:
880:
783:
780:
766:
739:Rhode Island Red
724:. Thank you :).
709:
706:
688:
685:
666:
663:
610:
580:
332:
329:
291:
288:
265:
262:
222:
219:
109:
90:
75:
16:
1077:
1076:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1051:the voting page
1017:
992:
881:
874:
832:
827:
794:
781:
778:
772:
749:
741:
707:
704:
686:
683:
664:
661:
651:
632:
611:
604:
589:
570:
558:
549:
545:
509:
500:
498:Juice Plus/NPOV
469:
467:RoHS and Swatch
450:
379:
349:
327:
286:
260:
235:
217:
131:
116:
91:
73:
68:, ask me on my
51:Manual of Style
41:Help on editing
24:
12:
11:
5:
1075:
1073:
1020:
1016:
1011:
991:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
976:
947:
946:
945:
941:
904:
873:
860:
846:
845:
839:
831:
828:
814:
795:
793:
790:
771:
768:
740:
737:
720:
718:
717:
716:
715:
695:
694:
650:
647:
631:
628:
626:
603:
590:
588:
585:
583:
557:
554:
546:
544:
541:
540:
539:
508:
505:
499:
496:
468:
465:
449:
446:
445:
444:
378:
375:
353:AfD discussion
348:
347:2nd XMonad AfD
345:
344:
343:
342:
341:
340:
339:
303:
302:
301:
300:
299:
298:
234:
231:
230:
229:
193:
192:
182:
162:
161:
136:
135:
130:
127:
115:
112:
85:
84:
62:sign your name
54:
53:
48:
43:
38:
20:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1074:
1065:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1015:
1012:
1010:
1009:
1005:
1001:
998:. Sincerely,
997:
989:
975:
971:
967:
963:
962:
961:
957:
953:
952:Radiantenergy
948:
942:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
931:
927:
923:
922:
921:
917:
913:
912:Radiantenergy
909:
908:
905:
902:
898:
897:
896:
895:
894:
893:
889:
885:
884:Radiantenergy
878:
871:
864:
859:
858:
854:
850:
849:Radiantenergy
843:
840:
837:
834:
833:
829:
826:
824:
820:
815:
811:
807:
799:
791:
789:
788:
785:
784:
769:
767:
765:
761:
757:
756:99.40.232.236
753:
745:
738:
736:
735:
731:
727:
723:
714:
711:
710:
699:
698:
697:
696:
693:
690:
689:
678:
674:
673:
672:
671:
668:
667:
657:
648:
646:
645:
641:
637:
629:
627:
624:
623:
619:
615:
608:
601:
594:
586:
584:
581:
578:
574:
568:
564:
555:
553:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
525:
524:
523:
519:
515:
506:
504:
497:
495:
494:
490:
486:
480:
476:
472:
466:
464:
463:
459:
455:
447:
442:
439:
436:
433:
430:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:
413:
411:
408:
405:
402:
399:
396:
392:
388:
384:
376:
374:
372:
369:
365:
362:
358:
354:
346:
338:
334:
330:
324:
321:
320:
318:
314:
311:
307:
306:
305:
304:
297:
293:
289:
282:
281:
280:
277:
273:
272:
271:
267:
263:
257:
256:
255:
254:
251:
247:
242:
240:
232:
228:
224:
220:
214:
213:
210:
208:
203:
190:
186:
185:participating
183:
180:
177:
176:
175:
173:
169:
159:
155:
154:
153:
152:
149:
144:
140:
133:
132:
128:
126:
125:
122:
113:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
83:
82:
77:
71:
67:
63:
59:
52:
49:
47:
44:
42:
39:
37:
34:
33:
32:
30:
23:
17:
1018:
993:
882:
847:
819:subst:Cookie
816:
803:
777:
773:
746:
742:
726:Dilip rajeev
719:
703:
682:
676:
660:
655:
652:
633:
625:
612:
582:
559:
550:
510:
501:
485:Prosecreator
481:
477:
473:
470:
451:
421:
418:village pump
389:and we must
380:
350:
309:
243:
236:
206:
201:
198:
184:
178:
171:
167:
165:
145:
141:
137:
117:
92:— Preceding
88:
81:Deathgleaner
78:
55:
26:
21:
1000:GeorgeLouis
823:subst:munch
750:—Preceding
636:White adept
571:—Preceding
368:24 December
98:Jeanclauduc
1039:topic bans
563:Worrydream
529:Tmtoulouse
514:Tmtoulouse
364:(contribs)
74:{{helpme}}
58:Wikipedian
1035:site bans
944:anything.
317:this post
121:Russeasby
70:talk page
60:! Please
990:RFC/User
875:You can
830:Question
810:WikiLove
752:unsigned
649:Sai Baba
605:You can
587:Talkback
507:Question
328:FayssalF
287:FayssalF
261:FayssalF
218:FayssalF
146:Thanks.
106:contribs
94:unsigned
46:Tutorial
966:Andries
926:Bhimaji
656:However
573:undated
471:Hello,
454:Low Sea
391:be bold
323:WP:SHUN
315:but in
276:Bhimaji
250:Bhimaji
179:editing
148:Bhimaji
29:welcome
1025:. The
806:cookie
782:pearls
708:pearls
687:pearls
665:pearls
377:Moving
373:(GMT)
366:02:02
357:XMonad
355:about
174:when:
158:WP:COI
114:Praise
844:Why?.
825:}}!
383:there
361:Gwern
202:minor
170:, or
168:avoid
1059:talk
1004:talk
970:talk
956:talk
930:talk
916:talk
888:talk
853:talk
838:Why?
760:talk
730:talk
640:talk
618:talk
567:talk
533:talk
518:talk
489:talk
458:talk
371:2007
102:talk
1019:Hi,
779:Ono
705:Ono
684:Ono
662:Ono
569:)
310:not
187:in
1061:)
1037:,
1006:)
972:)
958:)
932:)
918:)
890:)
855:)
762:)
732:)
677:is
642:)
620:)
535:)
520:)
491:)
460:)
424:--
422::P
331:-
290:-
264:-
221:-
108:)
104:•
1057:(
1002:(
968:(
954:(
928:(
914:(
903:.
886:(
872:.
851:(
758:(
728:(
638:(
616:(
602:.
579:.
565:(
531:(
516:(
487:(
456:(
441:K
438:a
435:m
432:a
429:s
426:O
410:K
407:a
404:m
401:a
398:s
395:O
100:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.