User talk:David Martin Zeegen Roth
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, David Martin Zeegen Roth, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Simplified Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
B12
[edit]Please read http://www.veganhealth.org/b12/plant carefully before you keep messing with unreliable primary sources. See B12:TALK. SBHarris 08:02, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
David Martin Zeegen Roth, you are invited to the Teahouse
[edit]
|
Hi David Martin Zeegen Roth! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
December 2012
[edit]
Your recent editing history at Vitamin B12 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
[edit]Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)Please discuss the subject
[edit]Your edits are currently being discussed at Talk:Vitamin B12 deficiency. You are likely to find similar dicussions at Talk:Vitamin B12, Talk:Veganism, Talk:Vegan nutrition and a dozen or so other articles where editors have repeatedly tried to push fringe claims that there are various non-animal foods that supply B12. The consensus against this is quite clear, both here at Wikipedia and in reliable sources from relevant academic sources*. Please discuss this issue before trying to add claims contrary to this consensus. Thanks.
*According to the U.S. National Institutes of Health: "natural food sources of vitamin B12 are limited to foods that come from animals."[1]
"Vegans need to look to fortified foods or supplements to get vitamin B12 in their diet." - Vegetarian Resource Group
"Contrary to the many rumors, there are no reliable, unfortified plant sources of vitamin B12, including tempeh, seaweeds, and organic produce. One of the earliest studies conducted on vegans, from the U.K. in 1955, described significant vitamin B12 deficiency in the vegans with some suffering from nerve damage and dementia. This, as well as many case studies since then of vitamin B12 deficiency in vegans, and a great deal of other evidence detailed here, has led to the overwhelming consensus in the mainstream nutrition community, as well as among vegan health professionals, that vitamin B12 fortified foods or supplements are necessary for the optimal health of vegans, and even vegetarians in many cases." - Vegan Outreach
"Because plant foods do not naturally contain vitamin B12, unsupplemented vegan diets are theoretically completely lacking in this nutrient." - The Dietitian's Guide to Vegetarian Diets
"Tempeh, miso, sea vegetables, and other plant foods are sometimes reported to contain vitamin B12. These products, however, are not reliable sources of the vitamin. The standard method for measuring vitamin B12 in foods measures both active and inactive forms of vitamin B12. The inactive form (also called analogues) actually interferes with normal vitamin B12 absorption and metabolism (7). When only active vitamin B12 is measured, plant foods including fermented soyfoods and sea vegetables do not contain significant amounts of active vitamin B12 (8)." - The Vegetarian Resource Group
"There is no active vitamin B-12 in anything that grows out of the ground; storage vitamin B-12 is fouind only in animal products where it is ubiquitous..."; "Fermented products, such as soy products like twmpeh, do not contain substantial amounts of B-12."; "...there is practically no vitamin B-12 in (spirulinas)."; ""The vegan diet...contains no vitamin B-12 except trace amounts in some ... root nodules. Careful studies from England on several hundred vegans showed that they all eventually get vitamin B-12 deficiency disease with anemia and pancytopenia, low white counts, low red coundts, low platelet counts, and slowed DNA synthesis. Vegans all eventually have slowed DNA synthesis, Which is corrected by vitamin B-12." Vitamin B-12: plant sources, requirements, and assay, Am J Clin Nutr 1988; 48:852-8 - SummerPhD (talk) 05:25, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Vitamin B12 deficiency that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. "Seriously, are you drunk?"[1] SummerPhD (talk) 06:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Vitamin B12 deficiency. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 09:37, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
I am more than happy to engage in discussions, but may I request that we do so on the talk page of the article instead of my personal talk page? We already have two discussions ongoing there, and that way others can take part as well. Also, to CollegePhd, I am sorry if my bluntness offended you. But honestly I took my cue from you when you invited me to discuss things in talk by saying that I have brain damage. David Martin Zeegen Roth (talk) 10:20, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- There is a distinct difference between saying a theoretical belief (one that no one has claimed) is absurd enough to demonstrate diminished mental capacity (i.e. that something "might be evaluated" for B12 means it is a source of B12) and the comments you made. That said, I've struck the comment. Please discuss the article's content on the article's talk page before re-adding disputed material. Wikipedia works through consensus. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:55, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Civility
[edit]I've redacted several PA's by you at Talk:Vitamin B12 deficiency. You'll get blocked if you continue that way. See WP:Civility William M. Connolley (talk) 11:27, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Cool thanks for the help and the heads up. David Martin Zeegen Roth (talk) 11:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Broken 3RR
[edit]You're broken WP:3RR on Vitamin B12 deficiency. I'm writing up the report for WP:AN3 now; you've got until I finish to self-revert your most recent revert. But judging by your previous responses, I doubt you will William M. Connolley (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
- [2]. I've only just noticed you got blocked for this a couple of days ago. Did you learn nothing from that? William M. Connolley (talk) 22:53, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
SPI notification
[edit]
You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/David Martin Zeegen Roth. Or rather, you will have to post your defense here and someone will copy it over to the SPI page. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
December 2012
[edit] Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. You were reverted by a wide variety of editors, not just William M. Connelley, who reverted your illicit use of sock puppets. Sockpuppetry, bad-faith accusations, and refusal to hear out correction from several editors are behaviors of tendentious editors who usually get blocked. Do not project your grudge onto other users. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Vitamin B12. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Accusations without evidence are considered personal attacks, especially when calling someone's contributions worthless. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.