User talk:Mnachtrab

Welcome!

Hello, Mnachtrab, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Best practices for editors with close associations
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Alexbrn (talk) 10:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Nemsys

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Nemsys, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Ts12rAc^{talk to me} 18:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Simufilam. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:53, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Mnachtrab. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Cassava Sciences, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.

For the avoidance of any doubt, if for example you are a shareholder in Cassava, you should disclose this and only suggest changes on the talk page. SmartSE (talk) 14:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Cassava Sciences for disruptive WP:COI edits. The article talk page is still available to you. If you continue to edit in a manner that contradicts our policies and guidelines (including your deleted draft), the block will be broadened..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mnachtrab (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am new to WIKI. I understand I have a small conflict of interest because I do hold stock in Cassava. I posted the conflict of interest on my page. Because I am new to WIKI I did not understand the issues I caused by just editing all the areas of the page. I will be much more cautious with my edits to make sure my conflict of interest are harmless noncontroversial edits. Any substantial edits I will raise through the talk page and suggest before I do them Mnachtrab (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per discussion below. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Mnachtrab (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Small conflict of interest? And you have not yet disclosed whether you have any personal relationship to Alzheimer's disease and its research that might be influencing your edits. Your COI editing is also disrupting the article talk page and impeding progress on the article. I suggest WP:NOTHERE applies in spades. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not disrupting the article talk page and disrupting progress. I am working to help get bias out of the page and get more truth in. People who are editing the page now must have bias to put words like "scheme" to describe a compensation plan.

People interested in a company or topic does not exclude them from having a say. FYI, nearly everyone in the world has a connection to Alzheimer's disease.

Do you have any personal relationship to Alzheimer's disease? I am starting to suspect you have some sort of conflict of interest to start to make claims that my connection to a disease make me unable to make informed suggestions even on the talk page. Mnachtrab (talk) 18:15, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re your "my connection to a disease"; have you promoted Cassava Sciences as holding the best yet solution to such "connection"? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:23, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not proven to be that yet as they need to complete phase 3. The phase 2 1 year adas-cog11 data is the best data among all the other trial data I have reviewed. I have reviewed about 160 studies of AD treatments. Any treatment that safely helps AD patients would be a great treatment. I don't see how that would cause any issues being able to fairly edit the page. I find it odd that you are suggesting a person with a connection to a common disease is a conflict of interest to write about a company that has a treatment for the disease. Mnachtrab (talk) 20:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to creating the G11 Draft:Nemsys. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking admin note: The partial block was meant to stop immediate disruption. If any reviewing admin believes the block should be modified to site-wide, please go ahead.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:35, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It continues on article talk at 17:17 1 September. WP:NOTHERE, suggest a full block. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:10, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am answering Sandy's questions. This isn't fair and is squashing reasonable input to a wiki page about a company. Mnachtrab (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why would a couple days worth of questions and edits block me from editing the main site and the talk page? If this is followed through on, I will be escalating to get SandyGeorgia removed as reviewing admin. I do not think you are looking at the way she is communicating https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Ponyo Mnachtrab (talk) 20:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To get me removed as such, you'd first have to find someone to agree that I'm a "reviewing admin". Please read before posting. I'm just a regular editor, noting that you continue with problematic edits on the article talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Mnachtrab (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at User:Mnachtrab's edits on the Cassava Sciences page, and its talk page, shows that this editor does not understand the use of independent secondary sourcing, editing from a neutral point of view based on reliable sources, and has no idea what the relevant guidelines and policies are for editing in article spaces. This editor also doesn't seem to understand how their behavior has been disruptive. So, I recommend that this block should not be lifted at this time. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 01:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I think this editor should also be blocked from the Cassava Sciences talk page. Their disruption is continuing there. In the last section entitled "Suggested Addition to Alzheimer's" this editor has been insisting that a reliable source be replaced by a primary source and that information be garnered from that primary source in lieu of the reliably sourced information. Here is the diff [1]. it seems to be an ongoing case of WP:IDHT and NOTHERE. This editor is wearing down an experienced and productive editor who is cleaning out the POV in that article. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mnachtrab (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The Cassava and Simufilam pages are being controlled by very biased editors. They escalate to admins any time anyone comes in and tries to make the page less biased. The story of simufilam and Cassava should be told on their pages. The company has followed FDA process and legitimately is trialing Alzheimer's disease treatments but the page reads terrible. It is blatentenly biased. I do not want to hide accusations... just put them in one section. Mnachtrab (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's clear that your conflict of interest is too strong for you to be able to edit the article according to Wikipedia guidelines. Wikipedia's only interest is in summarizing independent reliable sources, not primary sources. Wikipedia is not for "telling the story of the drug and the company". That's what the company website is for. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Talk page disruption

See WP:TEND, WP:DUE, and WP:IDHT.

Even after all of the discussion above, your gift this morning was four threads at Talk:Cassava Sciences that had to be addresssed, all based on churnalism sourcing. [2]. If this behavior continues, I'll be formally seeking your ban from all related topics, per WP:NOTHERE. Wikipedia does not engage in the kind of "reporting" done by outlets like seekingalpha.com. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Block modified

Note that I've modified your partial block to include Simufilam. It is becoming increasingly apparent that you cannot edit these topics neutrally due to your conflict of interest. If there are any further issues, the block will likely be modified to site wide.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:59, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to make change through the Talk page but am being ignored there.

Read my edits. They are making the page more neutral. You are jumping to conclusions. I am moving the accusations to the accusation section. They are redundantly mentioned all over the history of simufilam to make it seem like the whole drug is a controversy vs. company that properly followed protocol. The controversy and accusations should be put in that. This page is VERY unfair toward Simufilam. Please unblock. Mnachtrab (talk) 23:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I almost made your block sitewide, but did not see that Ponyo had already modified it to include the Simufilam article. If you persist in pressing your point on the talk pages, you will be blocked from them too, if not the whole site. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #64100

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mnachtrab (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was trying to edit another page on wiki and realized I am blocked everywhere. Look, the wiki page of simufilam and cassava scienses is controlled by individuals very negative about the company. There is clearly something wrong there, but I am not skilled enough at wiki policy to get past their edit wall. I gave up. I will let the truth come out when the secondary sources eventually learn the truth and write about it. Why block me wiki wide from editing though? This approach is just going to punish people that are new to wiki trying to bring the truth out. I was never a sockpuppet. I was trying to fix issues I see wrong with the cassava page. It is insulting for someone to call me a sock puppet as it is totally false. I am totally comfortable with my real identity being used. I am not hiding who I am behind an alias. Please remove my block Mnachtrab (talk) 10:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You've worked hard to demonstrate you don't understand how to edit Wikipedia appropriately. Even in this unblock request, you blame others for the consequences of your own behaviour. Yamla (talk) 11:30, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.