IMPORTANT! READ BEFORE POSTING
If you are here to accuse me of any of the following
- Being a sock puppet
- Being a lizard person who is controlling the government
- Spreading mind control nanobots with chem trails
- Faking the moon landing
- Suppressing information about the flat world
Please leave your credit card information and social security number with your complaint, and I will get to you shortly
If you are suffering from the delusion that:
- I am editing articles you edit, solely for the reason you are editing them,
- I give a damn about what pages you edit
- You are the most important being in the universe
- Your cat is trying to kill you
- Bill Clinton is in love with you
- You are important enough in my life to for you to affect which pages I largely choose to edit
Please contact a mental health professional. Thank you
Welcome!
Hello, Petergstrom, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Milo (drink), have removed content without an explanation. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.
If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and how to develop articles
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- Article wizard for creating new articles
- Simplified Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Tuanminh01 (talk) 06:40, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
--Cameron11598 (Talk) 01:50, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
![Stop icon with clock](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/39/Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg/40px-Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg.png)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
-->
References
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Information.svg/35px-Information.svg.png)
Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Jytdog (talk) 01:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Jytdog (talk) 19:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
The content was sourced!! What are you talking about?
what about adding this source https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2939140/
- have you read WP:MEDRS? at least read WP:MEDDEF. Please let me know if you have read and are engaging with this essential guideline. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
-->
Jytdog (talk) 19:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
-->
Editing Wikipedia
Every time you edit Wikipedia and click "save", you have already agreed to follow the Terms of Use. (if you reply, while you have the edit window open, look down, below "Watch this page" and above the "save changes" button. It says: "By saving changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license."
If you read the Terms of Use, they say: ":The Wikimedia community and its members may also take action when so allowed by the community or Foundation policies applicable to the specific Project edition, including but not limited to warning, investigating, blocking, or banning users who violate those policies. You agree to comply with the final decisions of dispute resolution bodies that are established by the community for the specific Project editions (such as arbitration committees); these decisions may include sanctions as set out by the policy of the specific Project edition."
If you read the WP policy on policies and guidelines, it explains the role that policies and guidelines play in the Wikipedia community.
WP:MEDRS is a crucial guideline.
You cannot just keep ignoring it. Please read and follow it. If you don't understand it, please ask, and I will be happy to explain it.
Thanks Jytdog (talk) 04:47, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- I did read it. I am not ignoring it, the sources are totally valid, stop reverting the edits.
- The refs are not valid per MEDRS. This is just not some "rule" somebody pulled out of their butt. The community developed it for very good reasons and we apply it consistently for very good reasons. If you don't understand why the community developed MEDRS please ask. Please. Jytdog (talk) 05:29, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes we need secondary sources such as review articles not primary sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:08, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- The refs are not valid per MEDRS. This is just not some "rule" somebody pulled out of their butt. The community developed it for very good reasons and we apply it consistently for very good reasons. If you don't understand why the community developed MEDRS please ask. Please. Jytdog (talk) 05:29, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
WP:MEDRS doesn't say that secondary or tertiary sources are necessary, there is a section on wording primary sources. It says that they generally should not be used. Generally.
Reference errors on 25 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Antidepressant page, your edit caused a PMID error (help). ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 29 November
ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC) -->
Jytdog (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
MEDRS doesn't specific that primary sources have to be avoided. I have justification for the use of the primary sources, it is not my POV that is being forced onto the page.Petergstrom (talk) 20:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Consensus is that we use secondary sources for medical content. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
So...follow MEDRS religiously until you don't agree with it? Petergstrom (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- pasting content here that was left on my talk page in this dif, to keep discussion in one place Jytdog (talk) 21:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- MEDRS doesn't specific that primary sources have to be avoided. I have justification for the use of the primary sources, it is not my POV that is being forced onto the page.Petergstrom (talk) 20:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petergstrom (talk • contribs)
- MEDRS says what we should do; when policies and guidelines say "should" they mean "should" - you need a good reason to do something different, and you have refused to justify your blowing off the guideline. It actually is OK to use primary sources from time to time (rarely) and you do need to justify when you do it. Jytdog (talk) 21:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- And more importantly, if the community allows you to pick some random primary sources and add content based on them, we have to let everyone do that. We have to let the autism advocate and the salesperson from Pfizer and the person who believes in Powerful Herbs do it too - in other words, all kinds of garbage content comes streaming into WP. That is what you are arguing for. Why would you do that? That is a real question. Jytdog (talk) 21:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Please do answer the question above. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 21:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- And more importantly, if the community allows you to pick some random primary sources and add content based on them, we have to let everyone do that. We have to let the autism advocate and the salesperson from Pfizer and the person who believes in Powerful Herbs do it too - in other words, all kinds of garbage content comes streaming into WP. That is what you are arguing for. Why would you do that? That is a real question. Jytdog (talk) 21:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Just because primary sources are used, doesn't mean low quality alternative medicine ideas can be brought inPetergstrom (talk) 22:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- You are not getting it. Everything in WP starts with sources. Not my opinion or yours about what is good science or not. There are so, so many arguments we avoid by excluding content due to the sources it was based on. We would waste an incredible amount of dealing with shitty content if we allowed people to use primary sources freely. Again, this was the reason MEDRS was developed. It saves us from so many horrible arguments with advocates of all kinds. When you have been around a while this will become more clear to you. Jytdog (talk)
Sounds good dad.Petergstrom (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) That's exactly what it means, because "low quality alternative medicine ideas" show up in lots of primary sources, but don't appear in the high quality secondary sources that MEDRS requires (other than to be debunked). Here are the ideas you want inserted into CFS:
- "altered cytokines early in the course of the disease compared to those with longer term disease" - sourced to a single 2015 study;
- "altered cytokine levels that differed between severe and moderate CFS patients" - sourced to a a single 2015 study;
- Why should those specific ideas override the present article text?
"Elevated levels of cytokines involved in generating sickness behavior have been found in those with CFS, however the results have not been consistent."
- sourced to a 2008 systematic review, and affirming that results have been found to vary from one study to another. Once you accept what the secondary source is saying about inconsistent results, you can see that there's no point in trying to cite individual studies because you have no basis to assume that these are not outliers. Now do you understand? --RexxS (talk) 00:06, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
yeeeee. I actually think that I put that sentence in there. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chronic_fatigue_syndrome&type=revision&diff=750134833&oldid=749952834
- so we have this discussion, and then you do this. Please consider this a last warning. Either start following MEDRS of I will seek to have you topic banned from editing about health. There is way too much work to be done here for us to constantly clean up after you. Your editing is becoming a time sink for the rest of us. Jytdog (talk) 18:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Fine dad. Here is a secondary source that mentions trauma: [1]
References
- ^ Dell'Osso, Liliana; Bazzichi, Laura; Baroni, Stefano; Falaschi, Valentina; Conversano, Ciro; Carmassi, Claudia; Marazziti, Donatella (1 March 2015). "The inflammatory hypothesis of mood spectrum broadened to fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome". ResearchGate. 33 Suppl 88 (1). ISSN 0392-856X.
- You can take what I am saying lightly if you want. You shouldn't. It seems that you could be a good contributor but I mean it; we have too few committed editors and you are wasting their time cleaning up after you. I will seek a topic ban the next time you add content about health based on a primary source without getting consensus on the associated talk page first. Jytdog (talk) 23:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Yea I got how this place works, I will stop using primary sources unless justified and run through other editors. Petergstrom (talk) 23:45, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
-->
hyperforin
don't know if you noticed this. That editor finally lost it. Was difficult to work with them, but that is unhappy. Jytdog (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Fantastic Petergstrom (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
November 2016
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/Ambox_warning_pn.svg/30px-Ambox_warning_pn.svg.png)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Chronic fatigue syndrome. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- 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; 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. RexxS (talk) 22:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Reference errors on 5 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Bipolar disorder page, your edit caused a DOI error (help). ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Beta-glucans in Pleurotus ostreatus mushrooms
PMID 23075555 is not a WP:MEDRS-quality source. It has an impact factor of only 2. Studies of supplements in exercise performance are prone to uncountable variables and errors. Nothing about this journal or the study design described is consistent with MEDRS. --Zefr (talk) 19:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Really happy you are contributing so much
Really I am! And thank you for using reviews. But you are adding so much, so fast, that it is really important that you take time - you - and make sure everything is OK before you click "save". Please. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 00:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC
Its the autofill with URL function. Sometimes it gets the date, sometimes it fills it with todays date Petergstrom (talk) 01:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I would like to further discuss the idea that you, and others, are postulating on emotion being a conscious experience, since I thought you are not following the changes in the talk page I thought I would give you a notice here as I would like you to comment in there to further elaborate, and feel free to remove this section in your talk page (and no, I'm not even logging in, just prefering to use IPs). thanks 186.144.41.175 (talk) 07:03, 5 January 2017 (UTC).
Things seemed to be going well...
And now this mess at MDMA. The recent history is a disaster.
I was just thinking how nice it is has been since you have learned better how the community that works on medical/health article operates.
What the heck is going on now? Please please use high quality, recent sources. if you cannot find any about X that is a good sign that we should not discuss X in WP. And please use the talk page to reach consensus.
We do end up taking action to bar disruption from people who refuse to learn and I do not want to go there with you. Jytdog (talk) 01:51, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Reference errors on 10 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Dopaminergic pathways page, your edit caused a URL error (help). ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Reference errors on 20 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Fibromyalgia page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
DSM5
The APA sent us a take down notice in the paste regarding our use of their criteria. If we are to use them we must paraphrase.[1] Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
<--
Threading
Hello! Your ANI thread would be significantly easier to follow—and more likely to gain serious attention—if you would thread your posts correctly by indenting each paragraph of your replies exactly one level deeper than the comment to which you are replying. Please review WP:THREAD for examples. Note that threading is required by our guidelines, although compliance is rarely enforced. See WP:TPYES ("Keep the layout clear: Keep the talk page attractively and clearly laid out, using standard formatting and threading." (emphasis added)). Thank you for your time. Rebbing 03:24, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Stuff
Here on your userpage you noted what happened at MDMA and you wrote "I learned about the importance of rhetoric". Please go deeper. Things like blowing off community norms about indenting noted above, ignoring WP:MED's emphasis on high quality sourcing and careful summarizing, and the general ethos here about authentically talking through disagreements, are all deep in the guts of this place in big and small ways. You need to take other people (especially established editors) more seriously as people and engage with them. Doing things like indenting correctly is a sign that you respect other people and their need to be able follow discussions. (small thing that signals deeper things) But instead you are establishing a pattern of not taking other people and community norms seriously, and it is hurting you. I noted this at the ANI here. I am not hopeless about you but my hope is dimming. fwiw. I hope you can turn things around. Jytdog (talk) 06:19, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- User:Jytdog Pretty much, I argued my case poorly(which I still do). In the end, the addictiveness was changed to low moderate, from moderate, because of all the sources pulled out, not a single one but my old crappy sources actually explicitly stated anything about addiction. Pretty much in my "flurry" of editing, and arguing I was not able to effectively communicate my point, and when I finally did, the conflict was resolved with a low to moderate instead of moderate rating.Petergstrom (talk) 06:24, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- nice header change. :) but your response pretty much missed the point of what i was trying to communicate to you. In any case I wish you well. Jytdog (talk) 06:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Jytdog: I'm confused. Essentially you were trying to communicate for me to clean up my interactions with other editors, as well as to edit better in general. How did that response miss that?Petergstrom (talk) 06:33, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- I was concerned that your remarks were focused on the fact that you were right about the content and the content finally moved toward your position. Which is not the point. But my apologies, if you got it, you got it. That's great. Jytdog (talk) 06:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Here are two suggestions: Never ever ever ever refer to another editor as "his/hers/its" again. That is appalling. And leave Flyer 22 Reborn 100% alone. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:49, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- Pro tip: the standard Navigation Popups plugin easily lets you view a user's gender (and other details) when you hover over a linked username. If you don't want to install that, there's also the {{gender}} template, which you can use in preview to find out a user's preferred gender pronouns. (You can set yours here.) Rebbing 09:53, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Jytdog: I'm confused. Essentially you were trying to communicate for me to clean up my interactions with other editors, as well as to edit better in general. How did that response miss that?Petergstrom (talk) 06:33, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
ANI closed
Hi,
This is to let you know that I have closed the ANI thread that you opened against Flyer22 Reborn. You have been topic banned from medicine and religion for 6 months and that ban will be swiftly re-applied if the pattern of editing continues. I have also found your harassment allegations of Flyer22 Reborn completely unsubstantiated. I would also remind you not to give the appearance of harassing someone, if anyone finds your interaction with them problematic, stop it or change it. You are also encouraged not to make aspersions or assumptions about someone's mental status.--5 albert square (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Petergstrom, please self revert these edits. They fall within the topic ban imposed above. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 17:57, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- I believe these additional edits also fall within the topic ban imposed above. - Mistercontributer (talk) 23:52, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Obsessive–compulsive disorder, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Caudate and Temporal gyrus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
About Stimulant and abused stimulant data
Hello, Petergstrom,
You add " It is estimated that the percent of the population that has abused amphetamines cocaine and MDMA combined is between .8% and 2.1%." in the leading paragraph of Stimulant[2]. The reference is [3]. However, I can't find the data in World Drug Report 2015 document. Could you help me to find out what page the data is in? Thanks--Wolfch (talk) 10:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
- please help translate this message into your local language via meta
![]() |
The 2016 Cure Award |
In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs. |
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
A page you started (Occipital epilepsy) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Occipital epilepsy, Petergstrom!
Wikipedia editor Winged Blades of Godric just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
V.Good!
To reply, leave a comment on Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.