This user is a participant in WikiProject Medicine.	This user does not understand mean people. Please be nice.
This user is a participant in WikiProject Mythology.	This user is a member of the Counter-Vandalism Unit.
This user is a participant in WikiProject Martial arts.	This user admires all expressions of nature.

Older messages are at Archive Aug 07

Hello, I wonder if you could, while editing diverse articles, check if they have sources in their history or chronology (or when they mention any important date. If they don't, could you please place inline {{Timefact}} calls where those citations to sources are missing, this will display ^{[chronology citation needed]}. If you find an article with too many inline calls to place or totally lacking needed history of the subject, you can instead place {{histrefm}} at the footnotes of the article's main page, just before Categories. If you could add this to your routines, it will most certainly help WP:TIMETRACE. Thank you for your help. Daoken 06:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your contributions to the article Kushindo. utcursch | talk 14:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What wonderfully kind and sweet message..! It was so nice of you. Let me know if I can ever be of any assistance to you... Dreadstar † 19:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After reviewing the history with some editors, it appears that the entire article began as a POV-fork from another article. I vote that it be deleted entirely. Djma12 ^(talk) 03:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I re-arranged what you put in the summary. I have a question about including computers: has EVP -voice- , as opposed to ITC, been observed on computers? I'm not sure but what the visual ones might be only ITC. ——Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 19:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks. Didn't know what you meant by that sentence (: ——Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 20:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic edits. Please stick around and rewrite the entire article if you have the time. :) —Viriditas | Talk 12:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please clone yourself asap. We need more of you! —Viriditas | Talk 19:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that was a wonderful edit on the vegetarian page. I decided to thank you and was surprised that others beat me to it! Thanks!--Crxssi 02:08, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it looks an editor deleted most of your hard work. See the page history and my comments at Talk:Veganism#Paragraphs_needing_work. I'm going offline due to a wikibreak, but I thought you should know. —Viriditas | Talk 09:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding !! Thank you so much for your help with the Kukishin Ryu article. Much appreciated! Any help is a BIG HELP! Kudos!

Mekugi 18:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Martial Arts Barnstar
		Awarded for your excellent and keen contributions to the Kukishin Ryu article! Mekugi 18:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have so much information here, along with the task of accurately editing it and putting it together, I am a little overwhelmed. So, the "little" contribution may seem little to you...but the fact that it was accurate, unbiased and extremely helpful is a lot. Greatly appreciated! keep up the excellent edits. Mekugi 19:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked the vandal, thanks for checking with me! I'm out of town this week, so my response time may be a bit slow... If you're interested, read through WP:VANDAL if you need more info. Hope all is well! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreadstar (talk • contribs) 02:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! Wow you have been busy...the article is really coming along nicely. I "changed" one of your references (Furyu) because I wasn't sure how it was meant. Is that a direct quote?? Should it be listed in the references (like I attempted) or should it stay as an in-line reference? Take a look at it and tell me what you think is best. Mekugi 14:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I messed up the code for the reference. Pop in and double check. I had to move the edition and what to the publisher section in the book citation. I just used the book code, not knowing the proper script.... Mekugi 15:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the source for their discovery in 1926. Is there some way to delete the speculation that is only sourced from websites, without starting a spam war?Pustelnik 11:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)Pustelnik 13:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we were working on this article at the same time. I re-added the PMID for the West/Anderson et. al. review article. PMID's are a little more useful in Wikipedia than ISSN numbers, but both serve the same function. If you click on the PMID, you get a link to PubMed that gives and abstract, if avaiable, as well as a list of similar publications. You can get the number from PubMed, then just type PMID(single space)(number) to access this function in Wikipedia.Pustelnik 18:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your latest revision looks very good to me. It is difficult to be totally objective, but I think you are achieving it. I like the molecular structure diagrams. I would summarize the known effects in women as epidemiologic evidence that they might reduce the risk of breast cancer, with speculation that this effect may be due to ingesting them in childhood and adolescence. There is also bench research showing that isolated phytoestrogens can promote growth of breast cancer cells 'in vitro', but no epidemiologic evidence that ingesting them as food promotes breast cancer growth or increases relapse rates in breast cancer survivors in humans. This is consistant with being weak estrogens in that they can work as weak agonists or as competitive antagonists. Do you think this is a fair appraisal or not? It probably is worth adding the xenoestrogen links, but I'm not into vitalism, and I would consider an estrogen to be an estrogen. I fight the idea that "natural is safe" almost every day in my practice. After all, tobacco and 'nux vomica' are natural substances. Yet another folk medicine phytoestrogen is fennel (the big seeds in Italian sausage). I'll add it, and I know there is a referrence, I think in Economic Botany. It was investigated once as a low-tech estrogen for locally manufactured Third-world oral contraceptives. I'm not opposed to including review articles at all, which is why I added the PMID for the West/Anderson. They are lower-level evidence for any claims.Pustelnik 14:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Jennylen, for your note on my Talk page and directing me to those wikiprojects. TimidGuy 16:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If 208.108.197.96 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) vandalizes after the time of the final warning you just issued, then I will block the user. The last warning was a few days ago, and for a block to be placed, the user would have to vandalize past a new final warning. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're warning the wrong people. see here, and here. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want me to solve the problem? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. If they continue let me know. You can also request a block if they continue reverting ℒibrarian2 15:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny, Recruiting people to make edits for you to avoid WP:3RR is a violation of WP:CANVASS. The same applies to you, Librarian2. Let's try to discuss this dispute on the talk page. No more reverts from anyone. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 15:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know very well that I didn't go to Librarian2, I just left her a thanks. But please by all means keep the mascarade if it helps you Jenny^Len☤ 16:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article True Origins concept, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 10:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can do that Jenny^Len☤ 10:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the correct template as nominated by author, I was never happy with that article so I guess better nothing than some-"thing" Jenny^Len☤ 11:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You recently commented on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psychiatric abuse, which was closed as delete. The article has been nominated for a deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 5#Psychiatric abuse. Please feel free to comment on the decision there - as a contributor to the original AfD, your input would be welcomed. -- ChrisO 09:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have many books (see Forensic psychology) but just this minute I don't have time to chase down the definition for the Insanity article. I wrote from my head, after years of doing sanity evaluations. I thought it would get by for a while as the article is basically sourced. The definition refers to the United States. Also, on reading it now, I see it needs some copy editing which I will do. --Mattisse 13:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a couple of references, but it is a very complicated issue, as I am sure you know. I have whole books trying to explain all the nuances. But I can get into it, if you want, as it is very interesting. Also, by getting into the intriguing questions, it makes POV statements more difficult to assert. That is what I have been trying to do in some of these articles - throw in some issue that complicates POV statements. None of this is as clear cut as the POV people would like. --Mattisse 21:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Avb 10:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny, can you possibly provide some additional background on this edit. Thanks. Nick 20:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of us are planning to reorganize the article Jainism, and perhaps some of the related articles.

Since you have made significant contributions to the article in the past, it would be great if you can give us some suggestions at the talk page Talk:Jainism. Thanks.

--Malaiya (talk) 20:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Koshindogatesymbol.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --B (talk) 16:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The original Copyright holder was traced and the release into public domain confirmed. The tags have been updated Jenny^Len☤ 09:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The permissions were forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, the image is now uploaded at commons [1] and it has been deleted at its first uploaded position as it can be used directly from commons now. All permissions appear at the commons address provided above. Once again, thank you for your help and all the best in this season. Jenny^Len☤ 09:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kyotokoshindo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --B (talk) 16:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The original Copyright holder was traced and the release into public domain confirmed. The tags have been updated Jenny^Len☤ 09:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The permissions were forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, the original images are now uploaded at commons [2] [3] [4] All permissions appear at the commons address provided above. Once again, thank you for your help and all the best in this season. Jenny^Len☤ 09:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kushindosymbol.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by B (talk • contribs) 16:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The original Copyright holder was traced and the release into public domain confirmed. The tags have been updated Jenny^Len☤ 09:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny, can you forward the statements of permission for these images to permissions-en@wikipedia.org? That way, the foundation will have a record of them. --B (talk) 15:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The permissions were forwarded to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, the image is now uploaded at commons [5] and it has been deleted at its first uploaded position as it can be used directly from commons now. All permissions appear at the commons address provided above. Once again, thank you for your help and all the best in this season. Jenny^Len☤ 09:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought you might like this video. It might serve as an example of what you were talking about that Adam Cuerden quoted in his response to your view. —Whig (talk) 03:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I happened upon your article on the Kingdom of Kibi. Excellent work. Thanks for contributing to such an oft-overlooked corner of Japanese history. I hope to see you around more in the future. LordAmeth (talk) 08:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you about personal things, but I noticed that the photo on your user page is from Yonaguni. Did you used to live there? I've gained a strong interest in Ryukyuan history lately, and am itching to go there... LordAmeth (talk) 13:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If neither you nor Djma12 have any objection, I'm going to change the title of this article to "Asian martial arts (origins)" or "Origins of Asian martial arts". JFD (talk) 15:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I want to change it to "Asian martial arts (origins)" is so that it will refer to all Asian martial arts. Is that going to be a problem? JFD (talk) 22:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I received my copy of The Shaolin Monastery: History, Religion, and the Chinese Martial Arts by Meir Shahar yesterday. Shahar is a professor of East Asian studies at Tel Aviv University and holds a PhD in East Asian Languages and Civilizations from Harvard; and his book is published by the University of Hawai'i Press. Moreover his articles on martial arts have been published in peer-reviewed journals including the Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies and Asia Major.

Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research—two of Wikipedia's three core content policies—both state that "the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses" and go on to say that "material that is self-published, whether on paper or online, is generally not regarded as reliable".

If this article must include material largely attributed to self-published sources online—and frankly I don't think that it does—don't we have an obligation to Wikipedia's readers to draw a distinction between reliable and unreliable sources?

JFD (talk) 13:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the article? Emma Orczy

Thanks. Wanderer57 (talk) 06:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-- Addbot (talk) 00:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maen. K. A. (talk) 23:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. You may not remember this, but back in October 2007 you added a sentence to Vegetarianism about how metabolism of vitamin B12 may be harmed by supplemental B12. I have raised some concerns about this sentence on Vegetarianism's talk page (Talk:Vegetarianism#Absorption interference from supplemental B12). I am proposing to change the meaning of the sentence significantly, and I would very much appreciate your views there to ensure that no inaccuracies are introduced. Thank you! -kotra (talk) 23:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely hope you'll change your shockingly incorrect opening text on the subject of Radionics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radionics for incorrect definition: Radionics is the use of blood, hair, a signature, or other substances unique to the person ...). For world members such as myself, who sat through both English and physics classes through high school and beyond, it is horrifying to find example of such a strong lack of dictionary use as a prominent feature of published media intended as [a] public (and international) encyclopaedia. The words radionic and radionics stem from the prefix radio- ... with the addition of the suffix -tronic, which usually implies electronic. A suggestion here is to start with the Collegiate version of the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, or a similarly authoritative text. Please talkback if you have issues about this set of comments, but do correct the referenced contribution page first! Blurbzone (talk) 12:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

• Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
• Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
• If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:20, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to invite you to join the WikiProject R&B and Soul Music. We are currently on demand for new members, the project was dying, but with your help we can revive it and make it one of the best WikiProjects. Make me sure that you'll think about this and remember cooperative works can do amazing things. Regards Dfrr (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]