User talk:Will Wiegman

May 2015

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 02:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I notice that you added some content to Amygdalin that appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint. Unfortunately, this edit appears to give undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tgeorgescu (talk) 17:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Tgeorgescu (talk) 17:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/129CBRider, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[User:Tgeorgescu|Tgeorgescu]] I am not aware that I have two Wiki accounts. I am also not a web page designer and this site is a bit difficult for me to understand in terms of how to correctly respond using the proper format although I am trying to learn more about it. I did get a new computer this year so maybe that has something to do with it. Will Wiegman (talk) 22:49, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't buy it, but you may present your case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/129CBRider. There is all the evidence and you may want to read it. Tgeorgescu (talk) 23:16, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Will Wiegman. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/129CBRider.
Message added 21:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vanjagenije (talk) 21:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. I notice that you added some content to Amygdalin that appears to be a minority or fringe viewpoint. Unfortunately, this edit appears to give undue weight to this minority viewpoint, and has been reverted. To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. Feel free to use the article's talk page to discuss this, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. This warning is about deleting the word "poisonous". Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]