User talk:Wiltonhall

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to WXOJ-LP 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:

• 01.pdf |work=Valley Advocate Newspaper date=2001-05-17 |first=Michael |last=Mannekin}} {cite web |title=Valley Activists Crusade for Free Speech |url=http://www.freedom-center.org/pdf/05-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American Psychiatric Association, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Donald Cameron (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wiltonhall. On my talk page, you said: "I see that you reverted my edit on the Metabolic syndrome page of wikipedia. My edit reflects the cited research and makes more accurate claims about Metabolic syndrome than the text you reverted to. Please explain why your edit is more accurate and should stand instead of my revision. For example, please present any evidence that rates of metabolic syndrome are higher among people with psych diagnosis without antipsychotic drug use present, or please present any research evidence for "predisposition" to metabolic syndrome."

First, please use the signature icon in the edit header to timestamp your discussions on talk pages. I made this revert and also this one because no WP:MEDRS systematic reviews are used to support the content, much of which is speculative or a synthesis from lab studies; see WP:SYNTH. Notice that the two remaining sources in the Management section are MEDRS reviews which adequately support the statements. Actual "management" of metabolic syndrome is a multidisease, potentially multidrug strategy, which has no universal approach due to the complex interacting variables. --Zefr (talk) 14:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Freedom Center (mental health organization) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freedom Center (mental health organization) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 21:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]