MrArt

Welcome to the Wikipedia!

Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, Artbristol! Thanks for weighing in over on the MMR vaccine article discussion. The Wikisuppression to which you have alluded, which have left enormous craters and otherwise pockmarked a growing number of the Wiki's medical articles, stems in part from evolving double standards that have gained foothold largely as a result of relentless Wikilawyering by certain stakeholders. Your concern is understandable, but perhaps the best that can be done is to start an article on the MMR vaccine controversy, similar to what became of the thimerosal article when the Wiki's medical lobby managed to burying the evidence of that iatrogenic nightmare over at the thimerosal controversy article. Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:

• Take a look at the New contributors' help page, the Wikipedia Tutorial and the Manual of Style, and If you still need any help, you can always post your question at the Help Desk.
• When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia and Assume good faith, but please keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
• Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
• Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends: Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: ~~~~. Best of luck, Artbristol, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 06:10, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Rename

As requested, I've changed your username to User:MrArt. You will probably want to move your user pages to the new name. Warofdreams talk 01:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. MrArt 03:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the reverting the vandalism on my talk page--1568 05:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No problemo. --MrArt 06:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

reply

Well, we can't let him loose on every writer in English history, so maybe we can just politely remind him about the other available resources so that he'll stop. Would you mind doing that? I'm so busy here! Thanks, AdamBiswanger1 00:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Thank you for cleaning up the vandalisms made to my user page =) Sir Vicious 23:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. MrArt 23:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

disambiguations

I have been putting things on disambiguations like millie disambiguation and tree, and you have gotten rid of what i put, but they are all true why are you getting rid of them? -hotspot

Sorry dude, I meant to leave you a message about it.

Unless there's an article about that character, it shouldn't be on the disambiguation page. Characters from a computer game generally aren't notable enough to have their own article anyway, so I got rid of them. - MrArt 13:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

but you got rid of this Millie (Suikoden) on millie disambiguation, and it is its own article.-hotspot

Edits to Witchcraft

Greetings, MrArt. While some definitions of the word "cult" may be applicable to Wicca, the word has received enough of a negative connotation of late that using the word in a neutral, NPOV context is difficult in the extreme. Thanks. :D Justin Eiler 16:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Found a modern practicioner of witchcraft. SHE is Evelyn Paglini. 205.240.144.220 20:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks Food irradiation

I can see your point and must admit that I was tempted into this note by the constant personal attacks by MonstretM against many people who disagree with him. I will edit my comment per your suggestion and thank you for your feedback. RayosMcQueen 14:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Food Irradiation. How to proceed

What is your suggested course of action with the food irradiation article? MonstretM is suggesting formal mediation but hasn't taken any steps thusfar. I am not sure how much merit there is in mediation as the good faith assumptions seem to be wearing thin on either side of the debate. My instincts tell me this will wind up in arbitration / probation, but would love to get your input. Arved Deecke 21:00, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, I suspect arbitration is the way to go. However the Arbitration Committee might be unwilling to hear the case until we've gone through formal mediation. I am willing to give mediation another go, as I suspect are you, but we'll see. Perhaps we should open a discussion on the current mediation talk page. - MrArt 02:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I have asked a list of formal mediators and arbitrators on advice on how to proceed, but have not had any feedback after five days. MonstretM has not had any activity over the same timeframe. I kind of agree with Arved Deecke that it is difficult to maintain optimisim for good faith given how mediation went last time. I read the arbitration pages and formal mediation is not a fixed requirement. I therefore propose we file for formal arbitration at this point. I will take initial steps but am certainly open for feedback if the group feels I might be trigger happy. Please feel free to discuss this on the arbitration section of th mediation page RayosMcQueen 18:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I have now filed a formal request for arbitration. Please provide your statment on this request on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Food_Irradiation RayosMcQueen 18:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I am anticipating that my statement on the arbitration request page will come across as overly personal given our previous conversations and your general graceful style. You may want to consider reviewing the feedback I got from the arbitration committe on my initital request that was entirely content based. RayosMcQueen 14:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well it seems arbitration is not going to help organize this. What do you feel are appropriate next steps? I hope we can have the article put on probation despite rejected arbitration and have placed such question on the talk page. What do you think will happen if we decide to lift the edit protection? Should we pursue formal mediation or RFC which seems to be the recommendation from the arbitration committee? Let me know what your thoughts are RayosMcQueen 17:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it was a good idea to request edit unprotection. I have started a major clean up and would much appreciate you feedback and thoughts. I am also trying to find a way to request comments from more users per the ArbCom's recommendation. You are right, strange decision, that was... RayosMcQueen 17:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

food irradiation post haste

I would much appreciate your input on the food irradiation article as it stands right now. RayosMcQueen 17:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Warren Buffett's salary

Hi - I noticed that you reverted it the last time Buffett's salary was deleted from the infobox, and I thought you might be interested in the discussion on the talk page there now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Warren_Buffett#Infobox_and_salary . Rray 23:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Food Irradiation help

The Food Irradiation page fell into disrepair. It was clearly abandoned by all editors, as the content was disjoint and made contradictory claims. I have done all I can to fix it (and pretty much finished 1 year ago), but I am not an expert in the topic. I know (based upon the quality of the article I started with) that some information must be incorrect do to my misinterpretation and rewording, and due to bogus claims. I would like to reduce the size and complexity of the article, verify its content, and improve the citations (especially in the sections that describe the irradiation process). Please help. 2602:304:415C:5399:2C40:7E88:E22D:B772 (talk) 20:52, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, MrArt. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)