User talk:KimDabelsteinPetersen/Archive 2018

Amazing

See here if you haven't caught that already. Amazing.--TMCk (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that is amazing... oh well, the diffs are quite clear. QG commented after the close, and reverted when i moved it outside the closure. 'tis amazing how rules are interpreted differently depending on who does it :) --Kim D. Petersen 22:55, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Safety of electronic cigarettes

Your recent editing history at Safety of electronic cigarettes shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

You claimed the content FV. Verification was provided. You reverted the quote that shows the content is sourced and then added a different tag. The content stating "A 2015 review found that these levels..." is a SYN violation and it fails verification because it is not a review. The undue weight is the source that is a SYN violation and not a review. The proposal on the talk page is unsourced. No sources were presented for "Formaldehyde is found in the aerosol but usually at a order of magnitude 1-3 fold lower than regular cigarettes. Under some scenarios it is generated at levels higher than cigarettes, and there is some controversy over the real world likelihood of this happening."[1] The information about formaldehyde is already in the body of the article. You are suggesting on the talk page the formaldehyde section needs expansion. I can expand it. Tell me specifically what is missing. You can also tell me what is missing from the image if anything is missing. If nothing significant is missing from the image then there is no problem with the image. QuackGuru (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Please do not tag the regulars - we are not in an edit-war! Neither of us are on more than 1RR --Kim D. Petersen 21:56, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

COI concerns

Hello, KimDabelsteinPetersen. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. This concerns your edits to electronic cigarette related pages. 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, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Do you agree to comply with WP:COI? QuackGuru (talk) 17:09, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

What utter nonsense are you now starting? You know as well as i do that i have specified by COI on my profile page, and it is noted on the e-cigarette article talk page. So this is tantamount to harassment. If you feel that i've overstepped the WP:COI rules, then there is a noticeboard specifically created for that kind of problems: WP:COIN. Please take whatever concerns you have to that board. --Kim D. Petersen 17:32, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for volunteering here with Wikipedia as well as volunteering to sit on the boards of concern for consumers who vape. I know how difficult it is to ensure a balanced article is available, and as we learn more, better and better sources will even the tide. Hold your post and press on into the wind.Mrphilip (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, KimDabelsteinPetersen. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)