User talk:MrBill3

This editor is a Veteran Editor II and is appropriately battle weary.

References

One of my primary activities on WP is working on references. I frequently verify and improve references on an article that has drawn my attention. My idea of improvement involves templates and uniform formatting. I also advocate for access dates and archive dates in numeric format (YYYY-DD-MMM). In general I prefer dates on WP to be DD Mmmm YYYY with the preceding exceptions, however I follow policy (in general) from MOS.

I also do research for articles that I am interested in or upon request (as time permits). I have been granted a one year subscription to HighBeam Research through the Wikipedia Library.

If you use a reference I have provided through HighBeam please include the url to the reference on HighBeam and "via HighBeam Research".

Tools

I use Twinkle. Actions I perform with Twinkle are usually carefully considered and taken within articles that I have read carefully and at least perused the talk page of the article. If you have an issue with something I have done using Twinkle post on the talk page of the article or here. I use AutoWikiBrowser. Actions I perform with AutoWikiBrowser are usually considered but I may not have checked the talk page of the article. I am bold in my approach to using AutoWikiBrowser to "clean up" the format of articles and references in them. If you have an issue with something I have done using AutoWikiBrowser please post here. I use STiki. STiki is an anti-vandalism tool that I use boldly. I evaluate the text STiki presents with a basic editorial eye if it looks like a duck it gets reverted. I revert unsourced additions boldly with STiki. If you have an issue with something I have done using STiki feel free to undo my edit and if needed post discussion here.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
2,360		Seth Rollins (talk)						Add sources
169		Mercury Monterey (talk)						Add sources
1,257		New York Mets (talk)						Add sources
3,352		Coffee (talk)						Add sources
45		Critical Care Medicine (talk)						Add sources
201		Babar Khan (talk)						Add sources
985		Washing machine (talk)						Cleanup
605		Pressure ulcer (talk)						Cleanup
132		History of ballooning (talk)						Cleanup
16		Pallasades Shopping Centre (talk)						Expand
4,266		Vatican City (talk)						Expand
54		Poetry of Catullus (talk)						Expand
203		2C-E (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
18		John Randolph Tucker High School (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
5		5-MAPDI (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
36		Process-oriented psychology (talk)						Merge
2,569		Extraversion and introversion (talk)						Merge
206		Sales process (talk)						Merge
212		Apple Maps (talk)						Wikify
35		Mercury S-55 (talk)						Wikify
62		Yo Momma (talk)						Wikify
4		Paired data (talk)						Orphan
14		Los Alegres de Terán (talk)						Orphan
3		Fred Lanting (talk)						Orphan
11		Albay Bikol language (talk)						Stub
33		Organ dysfunction (talk)						Stub
9		Rachel Carson Homestead (talk)						Stub
7		Alan Wace (talk)						Stub
18		Jai Rowell (talk)						Stub
16		3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-hydroxy-N-methylamphetamine (talk)						Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:12, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Just saw your Olive Branch

Hi,

I only saw your olive branch near the end of may last posting session. I had to go so had no time to respond. I wanted to say that I appreciated it and if I had more time, I would have offered you an Olive Branch back. :-)

Since I was under time pressure, I decided to just quickly withdraw my comment about Wikipedia policy versus thinking independently because I was concerned that my wording might have been getting too heated.

I withdrew another comment (about Overmedication) to avoid misunderstanding as it never had anything to do with you at all (or any other person posting on Dr. Daniel Amen- related pages), but I was concerned that it might be taken that way.

Thanks, Cliffswallow-vaulting (talk) 06:14, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the good wishes! We might not always agree but I appreciate your dedication, your carefully considered points and your passion to uphold the spirit and collective wisdom of Wikipedia!

Sincerely, Cliffswallow-vaulting (talk) 20:39, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Ken Ham

Always willing to have a discussion. Would you consider a compromise on the Ken Ham Article? Thank you for your willingness to discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.178.43.177 (talk) 13:51, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

See talk page of the article. - - MrBill3 (talk) 14:34, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Your recent editing history at Ken Ham shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
I see you have made four reverts in six hours. StAnselm (talk) 19:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Please note that most of those edits were reverts of an IP now blocked for edit warring. Note also that my "reverts" were restoration of material removed. Additionally the inclusion of the content is supported by numerous other editors. See Talk:Ken Ham/Archive 1#Editing the lead without discussion here first and that it continues to be supported for inclusion and restored. Given the consensus for keeping the material I suggest editors seeking to remove it find support and consensus on the talk page before removing the material. - - MrBill3 (talk) 19:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I see you've warned me twice on my talk page, but I don't understand what either of the warnings were for. StAnselm (talk) 23:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The warnings were for disruptive editing on a talk page. You have soapboxed on a fact not in question in the academic community and are now disputing what a "fact" is. These are not issues of debate per WP policy. Continued interference with constructive editing through talk page posts is a form of disruptive editing for which you can be blocked, banned etc. - - MrBill3 (talk) 23:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Daniel Amen, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, Sunray (talk) 07:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Welcome from STiki!

Hello, MrBill3, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Not a WVU alum myself, but born and raised there, and a season-ticket holder come football season. Let's Go ... Mountaineers. West.andrew.g (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank You,Yay!

Dear Mr.Bill3 i am wvc192005 i think i made a mistake on my edit but thanks for taking it off your very kind sinserly wvc192005

Wvc192005 (talk) 16:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem I am using an anti-vandalism tool, STiki, and it also finds fragmentary or apparently erroneous edits. I appreciate the feedback. - - MrBill3 (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Anthropic principle

Hi MrBill3, I added a section near the beginning of the wikipedia article for Anthropic principle, and seconds later you deleted it, and sent me what looks like a standard message. I have thought about the Anthropic principle for some time, and in trying to explain it to my friends, have developed a number of illustrations that my friends find useful. So I thought I had something to contribute. This is my first attempted contribution to wikipedia, so perhaps I've added my paragraph to the wrong place, or it is the wrong style, or perhaps there is no room for ideas, however useful, that certain people don't agree with. I welcome your comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Ponting (talk • contribs) 16:58, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

First sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~. Second WP is an encyclopedia, content needs to come from published reliable sources your original research or unpublished essay does not belong in an encyclopedia. Don't mean to be brusque, just being brief. - - MrBill3 (talk) 17:21, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

HI

THANKS FOR BEING GREAT

Wvc192005 (talk) 19:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Revision using STiki

Hi MrBill3, I noticed that you used STiki to identify one of my posts (on the Helen Caldicott article) as vandalism. I assure you that my edit was not vandalism but rather a constructive change to the article. I know that vandalism is an issue on Wikipedia and that automated tools are a big help in dealing with the problem, but please make sure that you double-check what the tools are doing when you use them. It would be very off putting for a new member of the community if one of their edits was incorrectly flagged as vandalism. Thanks for all of your good work though, 99.9% of what you do is great. 37.48.81.44 (talk) 06:21, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Apparently Daffydavid and Gandydancer share my interpretation of removing the sourced fact that Caldicott is a physician and using the characterization of "professional activist" as not constructive diff, diff. Your actions are edit warring as you have been reverted by three editors and repeatedly reinserted the content without discussion on the talk page. - - MrBill3 (talk) 01:49, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Regarding IAHP

You have been editing the IAHP page without a NPOV and have continuously made undocumented changes to my edits. My edits were clearly stated and the reasons why the edits were made. Please refrain from reverting. Comments were also made on the talk page. John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjibber76 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 16 April 2014 (UTC) Jjibber76 (talk) 04:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Take some time to actually read and understand WP:NPOV. This has been referred to the 3RR Notice board. See my comment on the talk page of the article. You made multiple edits with no edit summary. Your editing on this page is clearly WP:VANDALISM. - - MrBill3 (talk) 04:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

If you read the talk page of the article you will see extensive policy based explanations of content added and sources with multiple editors participating. - - MrBill3 (talk) 04:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. - - Jjibber76 (talk)) — Preceding undated comment added 04:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Perms

With 14,600 edits, I recommend you try for reviewer or Rollbacker first. When you have experience with those tools, try for admin. TitusFox^'Tribs 13:08, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Charles Panati

Thanks for your work on the Russell Targ article. If you have any spare time would you be able to help on the Charles Panati article? It needs references but I am having a hard time trying to find some. Goblin Face (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

"Author Panati is a former physicist and former science editor for Newsweek who 'for 16 years was taught by nuns and priests.' In addition to things Catholic, Panati provides interesting information on Jewish, Protestant, Hindu and other religions. The main focus of the well-researched and well-written book, however, is the Catholic faith." "the John Main Seminar, out of which the following book grew"

MrBill3 (talk) 17:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

"In his book, Panati's Parade of Fads, Follies and Manias, Charles Panati says the popular children's building set was invented by John L. Wright, son of architect Frank Lloyd Wright."

"The mystery of mistletoe can be found in Charles Panati's handy reference book Extraordinary Origins of Everyday Things." "As for the evolution of the rosy-cheeked, roly-poly Santa, Charles Panati credits 19th century cartoonist Thomas Nast for establishing the prototype for the modern Santa Claus." "'It was in America that Santa put on weight. The original St. Nicholas had been a tall, slender, elegant bishop, and that was the image perpetuated for centuries,' Panati wrote."

A review of his book The Geller Papers appears in Hyman, Ray (1989). The Elusive Quarry: A Scientific Appraisal of Psychical Research. Prometheus. pp. 300–. ISBN 9781615927593.

An article Panati wrote for New York magazine Better living through chemistry

"Euphemisms reign supreme in the language applied to death and discontinuation, where we have a tendency to stave off intimations of mortality with some linguistic sleight of hand. Panati's Extraordinary Endings Of Practically Everything And Everybody (Harper & Row, $14.95), compiled by Charles Panati, provides an extremely entertaining anthology of notable demises.

Panati casts a wide net, lingering fondly over some of history's more bizarre wills - George Bernard Shaw's specified that his tombstone not 'take the form of cross or any other instrument of torture' - and highlighting many of the superstitions that mark humanity's errant progress toward enlightenment. His discussion of castration, a once commonly practised but now extinct phenomenon, is a particularly fascinating example of his research into obscure but important areas of our checkered past."

"this text identifies the sources of pithy maxims such as 'the devil made me do it' or 'no pain no gain.' Panati's choice of sources is eclectic, including the Bible and the Declaration of Independence [...] cartoonists, songwriters, and comedians" "Chapters typically include a definition of the chapter topic and collections of quotes on the subject by notable people" "An entertaining browser; recommended for public and academic libraries where there is interest in the topic."

"Few books in the theological literature are simply fun to read and this is one of them." "an informative and entertaining book on the origins of religious ideas, sacred items, worship practices, holy symbols, and holidays." "discusses wonderful puzzlements such as why Jews don't eat pork [...] also explores the origins and history of more pressing, controversial, present-day concerns such as the bans on homosexuality, married priests, and birth control." "a few shortcomings [...] advertises itself as a book on world religions, the emphasis is mainly on Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, with only a smattering of other faiths." "lack of footnoting [...] unhelpful to serious scholars [...] minor complaints pale next to the wealth of information provided"

"I've devoted the past decade of my professional life to writing about the origins of things, from comets to condoms. Recently I published Sexy Origins and Intimate Things: The Rites and Rituals of Straights, Gays, Bi's, Drags, Trans, Virgins, and Others. I know something about monogamy historically -- and personally: I've lived with the same man for 25 years."

Some discussion of his work is in Kelsey, Morton T. (1997). The Other Side of Silence: Meditation for the Twenty-First Century. Paulist Press. pp. 154–. ISBN 9780809137008.

A couple of book reviews in Psychic magazine "book reviews". Psychic. Vol. 6–7. Bolen Company. 1974.

Well that's what I could find, not a lot of encyclopedic content but a little addition to the references section. - - MrBill3 (talk) 19:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Well done, thanks for this I will add some of them in. Goblin Face (talk) 22:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice and help. Is there any chance you can look at the Targ article again? I am not sure what to do as Targ keeps adding original research or deleting references. Goblin Face (talk) 20:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Stoney Case

Mr. Bill, while I may have a conflict of interest, I was simply adding some very relevant statistics and eliminating a few opinions and derogatory comments to clean up the info about Stoney Case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjcase (talk • contribs) 20:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Olive skin

Hi,is not vandalism my contribution in the Olive Skin page .I will revert .Is relevant put a picture of a person with olive skin.I will use STiki in some of your posts as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DasherRubber (talk • contribs) 02:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Deleted edit on Teaching English as a foreign language

Hi MrBill3,

You recently deleted my edit to the China section of Teaching English as a foreign language, due to it not being constructive? I would have to disagree with you, as the information in the China section is not entirely accurate, as it is. I was simply trying to update the information to show current salaries offered to teachers of English in China today. Please inform me as to how that is not constructive information. If you are referring to the external link attached in the reference connecting to a TEFL provider's job information page, then how do you explain the Reference #7 and #16, both linking to online TEFL course websites? Thank you in advance for the clarification. TaiwanEFLTeacher — Preceding unsigned comment added by TaiwanEFLTeacher (talk • contribs) 11:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~. The content you added was WP:SPAM. "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Thank you for your contributions. Please take some time to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's Five Pillars. MrBill3 (talk) 18:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Russell Targ

There may be an issue here, look what he is doing off Wikipedia asking people to come and edit his article - [1], shouldn't he blocked for this? Goblin Face (talk) 13:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

There should possibly be a WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents report about it. - - MrBill3 (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks!

MrBill3, thanks for noticing one of my recent edits. Do you think moving from the infobox style like |label1= |data1= to Template:Infobox organization or similar templates is helpful for ease of editing? I tend to boldly edit without asking on Talk unless I think to check for recent discussions, and usually avoid the more contentious articles. Kjtobo (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

In short yes. I am a fan of citation templates and infobox templates seem to provide many of the same advantages. I support bold editing in particular improving formatting and increasing consistency. The full and specific set of parameters in the better infobox templates gives editors guidance on what should be included and presents content uniformly formatted. Even contentious articles (sometimes especially) need some work on format etc. I say edit on, if someone has a problem they can revert and start a discussion. If you don't watchlist the pages you edit you may want to put something on your talk page (or your edit summaries) to suggest people post there. Thank you for your contributions to WP. - - MrBill3 (talk) 21:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for the welcome message

Hello MrBill3, Thanks for the intro message! This is my first time editing, and I'm interested in making improvements with good quality sources to back them up. I've been doing some reading on various pages related to alternative health and in various currently cited sources to educate myself before getting started. I see on the talk page for the Rolfing article that there has been some confusion about how to edit, and what counts as a quality source. My hope is to join in a very constructive manner from the start. I appreciate in advance any guidance in that regard. --Karinpower (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy editing and continue to contribute. A review of some of the policies and guidelines linked to on the welcome message is a good place to start. Unfortunately I have reverted your second edit to Rolfing, don't get discouraged there is a pretty steep learning curve. I posted a message on the talk page of the article with an explanation and links to the appropriate policies and guidelines. Alt Med and Fringe subjects can be quite contentious. While I encourage you to edit where your interests and passions lead you, might I suggest trying some basic edits on less controversial articles. I am willing to help out with pointers to and some explanation of policies and guidelines. You will find I am a strong advocate of policy compliance and willing to argue my position, I hope my conduct is received as WP:CIVIL. I particularly don't want to bite a newcomer. In editing alt med topics a good understanding of the neutral point of view and verifiability policies will serve you well in addition the WP:MEDRS guideline is important as is WP:FRINGE. The WP:Teahouse is a new user friendly place to get used to editing on WP. Best wishes and happy editing. - - MrBill3 (talk) 04:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Excuse me, sorry for the bad reference format but did you take out the pART i wrote in the YCIS page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manutd1020 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Please sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~. The entire article is promotional and requires a rewrite with secondary sources. Something other than the website of the subject itself. - - MrBill3 (talk) 22:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome!

Hello and thanks for the warm welcome message! Contributing to Wikipedia certainly is a learning curve.

You mentioned an edit I made to "Elliot Abravanel". The link I added there was to a new article called "The 25 Body Type System" that has not been reviewed yet ... is that the problem or did you see another issue with the link? BTW with your interests in science and medicine, you might find that article interesting.

This is my first article and I'm still trying to learn and understand the process so that I can contribute more. I think the article I created today is now available for review but I don't know how to be sure about that. If you have any quick tips for me that would be awesome!

Thanks again mykewolf9 Mykewolf9 (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

If you want to include the content with a link please add a source for the content (secondary, independent). - - MrBill3 (talk) 23:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Milan Puskar Health Right

MrBill3, I just came across your superb article for Milan Puskar Health Right! Have you considered nominating this article for DYK at Template talk:Did you know? Let me know if you need assistance with this, and I can nominate it for you. Job well done! -- Caponer (talk) 00:13, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Invitation join the new Physiology Wikiproject!

Physiology gives us an understanding of how and why things in the field of medicine happen. Together, let us jumpstart the project and get it going. Our energy is all it needs.

Based on the long felt gap for categorization and improvization of WP:MED articles relating to the field of physiology, the new WikiProject Physiology has been created. WikiProject Physiology is still in its infancy and needs your help. On behalf of a group of editors striving to improve the quality of physiology articles here on Wikipedia, I would like to invite you to come on board and participate in the betterment of physiology related articles. Help us to jumpstart this WikiProject.

• Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
• You can tag the talk pages of relevant articles with {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=}} with your assessment of the article class and importance alongwith. Please note that WP:Physiology, WP:Physio, WP:Phy can be used interchangeably.
• You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing physiology articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
• We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
• Why not try and strive to create a good article! Physiology related articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!
• Your contributions to the WikiProject page, related categories and templates is also welcome.
• To invite other editors to this WikiProject, copy and past this template (with the signature):
  • {{subst:WP Physiology–invite}} ~~~~
• To welcome editors of physiology articles, copy and past this template (with the signature):
  • {{subst:WP Physiology–welcome}} ~~~~
• You can feel free to contact us on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. You can also put your suggestions there and discuss the scope of participation.

Hoping for your cooperation! Diptanshu^Talk 12:17, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

The Socks

Bill, I tried to keep the socks talking in the hope that they would provide some useful information that could be used against them in your sock puppet investigation. I’ve noticed that 101.117.28.73 prefaces his signature with a double dash. 101.117.108.195 prefaces his signature with a double dash as well. So does 101.117.110.209, 101.117.57.43, and 101.117.58.97. These are presumably all the same person, and he claims to be using a dynamic IP address. [[2]]

The thing is that Anselm doesn’t sign that way. Anselm just leaves a space before his signature. The only people who are involved in the deletion discussion for pseudoscientists who sign with dashes are yourself, 172.251.77.75, and Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan and 172.251.77.75 consistently sign with double dashes, but don’t leave a space after the double dashes. The suspicious IP editor consistently leaves a space after his double dashes.

The point is that I don’t think that the IP is Anselm. He might be Anselm’s meat puppet, but he seems unlikely to be a sock. Either that or Anselm is just pretty good at socking. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 11:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:MEAT, "for the purpose of dispute resolution when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets." - - MrBill3 (talk) 11:14, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bone anchored hearing aid may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• to impaired hearing.{{Medical citation needed|date=May 2014}} It has been suggested{by whom}} that some part of the cognitive delay seen in these children is partly due to their poor hearing.{{
• * Cochlear Baha 3 BP100 Sound Processor) - released in 2009 the BP100 is a fully programmable, multi channel digital sound processor

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Autism Research Institute may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• General, Cleveland Clinic, UCLA, Arizona State University, UC Davis, and Columbia University.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.autism.com/index.php/about_2010_funded |title= ARI funded research

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language

	The Cure Award
	In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi, Doc James and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation

Your recent editing history at Russell Targ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Please watch that you do not violate the 3RR brightline rule. Binksternet (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Thought you could help answer a notification question

Hi. I haven't posted anything anywhere for several weeks. I just got notified that apparently two days ago, someone named DragonflySixtyseven reviewed my account. Can you tell me what that means? Do you know who that is? Is this something I need to do something about? The notification goes nowhere, so any info you can provide is most appreciated. Thanks. Sbwinter2 (talk) 01:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

From what I understand this is just a basic check to see that the account is not purely promotional or used for vandalism. I have had my sandbox pages reviewed (by the same user), that was to check that I didn't have inappropriate content. - - MrBill3 (talk) 01:37, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I was just about to write that I actually think I figured it out by looking on that user's talk page (it is hard to look up policy on wikipedia sometimes). Apparently many people ask that same question on his page. It is something routine. Thanks for getting back to me! Sbwinter2 (talk) 01:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "slanderous statements". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 05:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio on Autism Research Network?

Odd, with the amount of edits you've done,t hat the entire thing is now flagged as copyvio. What's the problem? Guy (Help!) 16:48, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Some of the text was cut and past from the autism.com website and I didn't want to muddy the waters of 3RR. I will just cut/paraphrase or put into quotes. FYI my edit process goes, 1)Read the article 2)Find and format the references 3)Verify the content using both the existing references and some research 4)Raise issues that are problems on talk page, join existing discussions 5)Research the subject 6)Change, add and or remove content with new and existing references. When I was verifying the content I found that some of the material was cut and paste from the source. Thanks. - - MrBill3 (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

GS?

Purely out of interest, do you belong to the Guerilla Skeptics organisation? Feel free to respond that you prefer not to say. --Brian Josephson (talk) 11:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Expedia

Hi MrBill3,

I have seen your work on Wikipedia and your copy-editing skills are spot on and very accurate. I would like to ask you if you could make edits to the page of Expedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedia), as there is some information missing from the page. Would you be willing to make edits to the page so that it's complete? The main areas that I think needs more information are the infobox on the top right, and external links.

To be specific, I think the infobox at top right needs more information, and fields more in line with other global travel brands like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TripAdvisor, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivago or and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vodafone_Hutchison_Australia. The infobox also needs to change URLs to be within 'website' (at the bottom) rather than 'Web address' (at the top), and it needs to include links to Expedia ccTLD: US, CA, UK, AU & NZ (in that order) in the same shape as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivago In regards to external Links, I think it should link to Expedia ccTLD in the same shape as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TripAdvisor with the same links as on #3.

Let me know, I would highly appreciate your assistance in this matter.

Erexkiss (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Not exactly my area of interest. The whole page looks too much like an advert to me. The external links (ELs) don't need to be excessive (just because other articles have too many ELs doesn't mean they all should). Can't you get to most of that from the main website? The article desperately needs third party independent reliable sources. Sounds like a good project for a new editor ;). If you are associated with the subject, make sure to declare a conflict of interest on the talk page before editing. Best wishes and happy editing. - - MrBill3 (talk) 12:59, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks MrBill. I noticed you sent a message to me on my talk page. You mentioned that I have previous contributions, which I don't have in relation to Expedia or any other entity, so I'm not sure how you came to this:-) The reason why I reached out to you is because I want to avoid any conflict of interest, and ask a third party contributor to make edits to a page. I hope this clarified it, if I'm mistaken about anything please forgive me, I'm not a seasoned Wikipedia Veteran like yourself:) Erexkiss (talk) 13:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

My apologies. Looking at your edit history I see you have not made edits to articles. You are approaching this in the correct manner. If you declare your conflict of interest on the talk page you may make proposals for changes. If you can find some good independent third party sources to support them they are likely to be accepted. Again, sorry, to my knowledge you have not made any inappropriate edits. I encourage your participation on WP. I will leave the welcome message as is because it has some links I think will be useful in your case, unless you object, then I will remove or modify it. - - MrBill3 (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm really not a vandal

The afrikaans word "skiem" is very real, and derived from the english word "scheme", which is listed on the same List of South African Slang words. Google shows many examples of usage by us Afrikaans folks: https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=skiem&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gl=za#channel=fs&gl=za&q=skiem+afrikaans&safe=off — Preceding unsigned comment added by LordFoom (talk • contribs) 14:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Look at the full edit diff. See the random junk added to, "bloutrein" quite possibly just an error. Please provide sources (not Google searches) for content you add. - - MrBill3 (talk) 14:34, 13 May 2014 (

Whoops, error indeed - source for slang is difficult, but I'll have a look

Nigel Cawthorne

Nigelcawthorne (talk) 15:19, 13 May 2014 (UTC)I am the author Nigel Cawthorne and I am trying to correct the numerous mistakes on the wikipedia page about. Every time I try to make alterations, I am accused of vandalism.Nigelcawthorne (talk) 15:19, 13 May 2014 (UTC) I understand that, as the subject of the page, I am not allowed to make changes. I do not have time right now to submit a draft article. But would it be possible to correct some of the grossest errors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nigelcawthorne (talk • contribs) 15:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Propose a set of changes on the talk page of the article (Nigel Cawthorne) with sources. That is the best way to proceed. If the changes are not made by another editor in a timely fashion you can put a notice on the WP:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. You can leave me a note here when you have made the proposal and if I get a chance I'll take a look. Best wishes. If there are unsourced errors in the article now, put a notice on WP:BLPN and they should be deleted immediately (this will likely be straight up cutting out of material not corrections). - - MrBill3 (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Mycenae

Thanks. I see you removed my comment. No problem as I had not figured out the talk page yet and was moving my comments there anyway.

Trusting that an editor will get back to me eventually with some useful communication!

Regards Sanzanipolo (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I suggest doing some research and improving the article yourself using reliable sources. Best wishes and happy editing. - - MrBill3 (talk) 15:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Sources Complaint

I'm a bit confused with the source complaint. My information came from the first citation in the article, which is a source, so what's the complaint again? TTTAssasinator (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Give me a link to the article and a diff of the change I made then I might have a clue what your talking about. If I reverted content you added stating unsourced, might I suggest a footnote referring to the source. If you feel the content was fully supported by a source present in the article by all means revert my revert (preferably adding a footnote). As I say above I work pretty fast with STiki and make mistakes on occasion. If my changes are not an improvement undo them. A diff here will help me see and understand, perhaps improving my use of STiki. Thank you for your contributions and thank you for bringing this to my attention. Best wishes and happy editing. - - MrBill3 (talk) 17:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_to_Kill_%28gang%29 is the article in question. As you can see from the edits, my information is backed up by the 1st citation. I apologize if it was not clear.TTTAssasinator (talk) 18:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I formatted the reference with a name and an sfn anchor. I am guessing you have the book in question, if you could add page numbers that would assist an editor or reader seeking to verify the content. As I said if you feel confident your content reflects the source go ahead and add the content again. - - MrBill3 (talk) 00:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

False vandalism warnings

Hello MrBill3. In future please do not falsely accuse me of vandalism, as you did here, simply because I made an edit that you disagree with for whatever reason. By the way, although you stated that I made "unconstructive" edits on talk:HIV/AIDS denialism, and that my edits there were reverted, a quick look at the revision history of that page shows that no edit I made there has been undone. Were you trying to accuse me of vandalism because of an edit that I made at Denial? It's irritating if you can't even be clear about which page you're falsely accusing me of vandalizing. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk)