User talk:Teapeat

Retired, I'm not going to put up with this crap.Teapeat (talk) 15:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Tea tree oil

Hi Teapeat, could I ask you to please stay focused on the sources at Talk:Tea tree oil and not cast so many aspersions at your fellow editors there? I understand your concerns about the sources, and I may agree with you on some of your points, but the insults directed the other editors there can actually get in the way of improving the sourcing. If you have issues with an editor, take it the editor's User Talk, as I see you have already... please don't continue the attack on an editor at an article Talk page. Content disputes can be taken to WP:DRN, behavior disputes to other venues, ANI is one as you have brought up. Zad68 19:52, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I wish I could, it's not just about sources, there's systematic misrepresentation going on.

Frankly, I'm being revert warred into the ground, and I no longer have any reason at this point to assume good faith. Every edit is extremely heavily slanted, cherry picked or based on completely unreliable sources.. that are being claimed as reliable. When I add reliable sources they get revert warred away and claimed as 'primary sources'. Older, out of date tertiary sources are repeatedly claimed to be more reliable than later secondary sources, and tertiary sources and unrelated sources are used far beyond their reasonable range. The presumption of the editors, at best, is that there's one view on this chemical, that they have it, and that they can remove anything that disagrees with their view, and write the Wikipedia to state that.

When I complain about it, they twist the words in the article subtly to still give the same false impression, but without any attempt at all at achieving true balance.Teapeat (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2013 (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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Recipients of the Langley Medal has been nominated for discussion

Category:Recipients of the Langley Medal, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lion lights

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Lion lights, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 17:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Lion lights for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lion lights is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lion lights until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)