User talk:BerkshireT

October 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Lingzhi (mushroom), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Lingzhi (mushroom). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. There are no high-quality clinical studies to support any medicinal effect of this mushroom. Use WP:MEDRS-quality sources. Zefr (talk) 14:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Lingzhi (mushroom). Zefr (talk) 19:31, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Lingzhi (mushroom) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Drugs.com is not identifying any drug in review of the mushroom, but simply summarizes the evidence and reviews the chemistry. You are also reverting a Cochrane review which says there is "insufficient evidence" for any benefit. Final warning: you can raise discussion on the talk page, but that will be futile. Zefr (talk) 21:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]