Misplaced Pages

User talk:M. A. Bruhn: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:31, 22 December 2016 editMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,457 edits Extended confirmed protection policy RfC: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery← Previous edit Revision as of 13:01, 25 July 2018 edit undoMichael Hardy (talk | contribs)Administrators210,279 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 128: Line 128:
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a ] ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ ]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">]</sup> <small>(sent by ] (]) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))</small> You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a ] ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ ]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">]</sup> <small>(sent by ] (]) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))</small>
<!-- Message sent by User:BU Rob13@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:BU_Rob13/MMS-Sandbox&oldid=756193177 --> <!-- Message sent by User:BU Rob13@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:BU_Rob13/MMS-Sandbox&oldid=756193177 -->

I continue to find it disturbing that your libelous comments are part of a permanent record.
:
You are the only person who uses the word "legitimacy" or "legitimate" on that page, and the initial use of the word "scam", a seemingly unmotivated accusation without specificity by the nominator, was withdrawn by the person who put it there.
:
Can you tell me specifically what evidence you have for your assertion that none of the participants have any publications in journals outside that of this organization. You don't get to be a professor by doing that, so they must have published things. And since when is it considered somehow wrong for a group of professors to come together via the blogosphere? And you '''assert''' that they have made "no outreach or collaboration with established networks of researchers/healthcare professionals". Do you have a reason to think that's true? Again, those among them who are established researchers or health care professionals didn't get there by having no communication with others. ] (]) 13:01, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:01, 25 July 2018

Welcome!

Hello, M. A. Bruhn! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Misplaced Pages. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Misplaced Pages, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing!  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 02:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines

The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Welcome!

Welcome to Misplaced Pages and Wikiproject Medicine

Hello, M. A. Bruhn, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, try Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your own talk page.

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to visit the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).


Again, welcome!

^^^ The above boilerplate provided merely because it's a convenient way to give you those links. I particularly like the "Ten Simple Rules" paper.

And for the real message: Thanks for joining the discussion at WT:MED today. I'm really glad to see you there, and I really appreciate your comments about the importance of sepsis and the difficulty of getting good numbers. I hope to see you again! WhatamIdoing (talk) 08:31, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome! I look forward to future participation with WikiProject Medicine :) M. A. Bruhn (talk) 01:12, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Sara

Thanks for the help. Could you edit episode 2 after repulsing a voyeur attempt by Jessie and Gertrude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stringlet (talkcontribs) 01:49, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing. I've gone ahead and edited it. M. A. Bruhn (talk) 03:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate the clarification. Not sure of the plot points so your input is most welcome.

A message from Batcrop, the "Ban the curiously robotic purple prose committee." Always on the lookout for Gotcrop, the "Generation of torrents of curiously robotic purple prose". Stringlet (talk) 07:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration propossed decision

Hi M. A. Bruhn, in the open Michael Hardy arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you.  Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 19:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Michael Hardy is reminded that:
    1. Administrators are expected to set an example with their behavior, including refraining from incivility and responding patiently to good-faith concerns about their conduct, even when those concerns are expressed suboptimally.
    2. All administrators are expected to keep their knowledge of core policies reasonably up to date.
    3. Further misconduct using the administrative tools will result in sanctions.
  2. MjolnirPants is reminded to use tactics that are consistent with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, and the 4th Pillar when dealing with other users they are in dispute with.
  3. The Arbitration Committee is reminded to carefully consider the appropriate scope of future case requests. The committee should limit "scope creep" and focus on specific items that are within the scope of the duties and responsibilities outlined in Arbitration Policy.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy closed

New Page Reviewer - RfC

Hi M. A. Bruhn. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Misplaced Pages:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13 (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))

I continue to find it disturbing that your libelous comments are part of a permanent record.

You are the only person who uses the word "legitimacy" or "legitimate" on that page, and the initial use of the word "scam", a seemingly unmotivated accusation without specificity by the nominator, was withdrawn by the person who put it there.

Can you tell me specifically what evidence you have for your assertion that none of the participants have any publications in journals outside that of this organization. You don't get to be a professor by doing that, so they must have published things. And since when is it considered somehow wrong for a group of professors to come together via the blogosphere? And you assert that they have made "no outreach or collaboration with established networks of researchers/healthcare professionals". Do you have a reason to think that's true? Again, those among them who are established researchers or health care professionals didn't get there by having no communication with others. Michael Hardy (talk) 13:01, 25 July 2018 (UTC)