User talk:Scottporad

Homeopathy question

Hi, Scott. Usually a member of the Welcoming Committee leaves a message for new participants, but as they're apparently a little behind, I copied and modified one of the form messages:

Hi Scottporad, and welcome to Wikipedia.

Thank you for finding the time to sign up and contribute to our little project. If you're in doubt about anything, you might want to check out some of these pages:

Welcome, newcomers - a general introduction, and a good starting point
The help center and FAQs
The Manual of Style - a guide to the community's writing conventions
Wikipedia:Glossary - if you run into any jargon you don't understand

It's also a good idea to sign the new user log and add a little about yourself.

When contributing to a talk page, you can sign your name by typing four tildes after your comments, like this: ~~~~>. Some people do not pay attention to unsigned comments. An important note: Please do not add this signature to encyclopedia articles you may edit, even if you have created them. Wikipedia articles are owned by the community, not by any one person.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me at my talk page, or at the Help desk or Village Pump.

But above all, make sure you be bold when contributing, and have fun!

OK, end of form intro. :)

Now, as to your point about Homeopathy: Yes, one could say that anything is controversial, but some are much more controversial than others. I think it's appropriate to make clear immediately that homeopathy is controversial, given that it's not accepted by the scientific establishment. To introduce it as a "system", without qualification, would give a false impression. An example from outside medical sciences: If you look at punctuated equilibrium, which is one version of evolution, you see it's characterized as a "theory", because some scientists support it and some don't. I don't think homeopathy rises even to that level.

There's also a particular concern among many people at Wikipedia about appearing to give medical advice. We have a standard disclaimer, but I think it's especially important that we not appear to give an imprimatur to medical views that don't conform to the prevailing professional standards for treatment. That may explain why we give more prominence to the controversial nature of homeopathy than to that of, for example, astrology. JamesMLane 00:36, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of DoStuff Media

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 DoStuff Media, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SAMI ^talk 07:05, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of DoStuff Network

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 DoStuff Network requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Bikeroo (talk) 07:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of DoStuff Network for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DoStuff Network 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/DoStuff Network until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:21, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Toadkill.png

Proposed deletion of File:Toadkill.png

The file File:Toadkill.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

orphaned image, no encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Scottporad/Five element acupuncture

A tag has been placed on User:Scottporad/Five element acupuncture requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dolly.com (company) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Dolly.com (company), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Celestina007 (talk) 20:56, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dolly.com (company) (October 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dolly.com (company) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dolly.com (company), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Scottporad! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 21:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dolly.com (company) (October 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Wingwatchers was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dolly.com (company) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dolly.com (company), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Wingwatchers (talk) 04:25, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dolly.com (company)

Hello, Scottporad. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dolly.com".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:36, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, I am disappointed in Wikipedia. It would seem that the editorial rules are applied selectively, arbitrarily and subjectively. This does not build trust or confidence in the quality of the material. In fact, just the opposite. I have been a long-time financial contributor to Wikipedia. Scott (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]