User talk:Drjoshcohen

Drjoshcohen, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Drjoshcohen! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Masumrezarock100 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Drjoshcohen, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Film/video-based therapy have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:05, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Diannaa

I understand and appreciate the importance of respecting copyright laws and intellectual property rights. I would like to clarify that I, as Joshua L Cohen, am the owner of the term "Film/video-based therapy" as it pertains to the specific methodologies and research I have pioneered and documented in my academic work.

While I recognize that the term "Film/video-based therapy" can be used generically, its specific application in the context of my work and publications is unique and proprietary. It's important to note that copyright of these works is held by me and my publisher, not Wikipedia or any other party. These works are not open-source, and their intellectual property rights need to be respected.

I'm aware of Wikipedia's guidelines regarding conflicts of interest, and I take these rules seriously. I understand that I should not write about myself, my work, or my interests on Wikipedia, in order to maintain a neutral point of view.

However, I have been using ChatGPT, an AI developed by OpenAI, to generate content based on my inputs. I believe this does not violate the conflict of interest rules, as it's not me writing the content directly. According to Wikipedia's guidelines, content generated by AI is considered as original authorship, as long as it is not simply copying or closely paraphrasing from copyrighted sources.

The content that I have contributed, through ChatGPT, is original, not closely paraphrased from copyrighted sources, and properly cited. The intention is to contribute to the Wikipedia community by providing accurate and reliable information about a specific field of psychology where I have expertise.

I'd like to understand more about how Wikipedia views the usage of AI like ChatGPT in generating content. If AI-generated content is viewed as original authorship, does this not suggest that such content can be used on Wikipedia to represent an author's original work without violating conflict of interest rules? I'd appreciate your insights on this matter.

Sincerely,

Joshua L Cohen Drjoshcohen (talk) 22:26, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Drjoshcohen[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Drjoshcohen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 11:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Links to user pages and sandboxes[edit]

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to user pages or sandboxes, as you did at Cinema therapy and Film/video-based therapy. Since these pages have not been accepted as articles, user pages, sandboxes and drafts are not suitable for linking in articles. and such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been deleted, please do not re-add any such links, thank you - Arjayay (talk) 11:34, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Arjayay,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to address the recent block placed on my Wikipedia account and to provide some clarification regarding the content I have been contributing.

Firstly, I want to emphasize that I am the author and owner of the concept and intellectual property known as "Film/Video-Based Therapy." I have invested significant time and effort into developing this approach and have published relevant research and articles on the topic. As evidence of my credentials, I would like to draw your attention to my ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/ [ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8849-2780]. It provides further verification of my expertise in this area.

I understand that the aim of blocking accounts is to prevent vandalism and inappropriate edits, and I appreciate your dedication to maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia. However, I assure you that my contributions are not intended to vandalize or misrepresent the content. On the contrary, my intention is to provide accurate and valuable information based on my expertise in the field.

I kindly request that you reconsider the block and take a closer look at my credentials and the validity of the information I have been adding. I believe that a thorough examination of my work will demonstrate that I am not only the rightful owner of the intellectual property but also an expert in the subject matter.

I genuinely appreciate your efforts in safeguarding Wikipedia's content, and I would be more than willing to engage in a constructive discussion regarding the inclusion of my work on the platform. I am open to providing additional references, citations, or any other form of evidence that may assist in verifying the accuracy and credibility of my contributions.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to a fruitful resolution and the opportunity to continue contributing my expertise to the Wikipedia community.

Sincerely,

Dr. Joshua Lee Cohen

Mark Image

Word Mark FILM/VIDEO-BASED THERAPY

Goods and Services IC 044. US 100 101. G & S: Art therapy; Psychotherapy services. FIRST USE: 20150206. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20150206

Standard Characters Claimed

Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK

Serial Number 86498577

Filing Date January 8, 2015

Current Basis 1A

Original Filing Basis 1B

Date Amended to Current Register May 5, 2015

Registration Number 4770701

Registration Date July 7, 2015

Owner (REGISTRANT) Cohen, Josh INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 2436 E 4th St #157 Long Beach CALIFORNIA 90814

Attorney of Record Rick Ruz, Esq.

Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "THERAPY" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN

Type of Mark SERVICE MARK

Register SUPPLEMENTAL

Affidavit Text SECT 8 (6-YR).

Live/Dead Indicator LIVE Drjoshcohen (talk) 21:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Drjoshcohen. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the pages Film/video-based therapy and Cinema therapy, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. 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, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:37, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arjayay,

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention. I understand the concerns regarding potential conflict of interest related to my contributions on the pages Film/video-based therapy and Cinema therapy. I appreciate the opportunity to address these concerns and assure you that I will adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies.

Regarding the conflict of interest guidelines, I understand that editors with a personal or financial connection to the subjects they write about may be influenced in their editing. I want to clarify that while I have knowledge and expertise in the field of film/video-based therapy and cinema therapy, I do not have any external relationship, financial interest, or personal gain associated with the topics or the related trademarks. The trademark is for public safety and public health by protecting the sancity of the license. By blocking the editing of this, it allows for unregulated use of film and art and the use of "therapy" to be used without a license in the context of a medical or psychological setting and that definition, without access to the public, could do more harm than good. I do respect your terms so to comply,

I will do the following:

Avoid editing or creating articles about myself, my family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors.

Propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles using the appropriate template for request edits.

Disclose any potential conflict of interest when discussing affected articles.

Refrain from linking to any organization's website in other articles in a manner that could be perceived as external link spamming.

Comply with Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines.

Furthermore, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use, I will disclose any employer, client, or affiliation if it becomes relevant to any of my contributions.

I want to assure you that my intention is to contribute valuable and neutral information to Wikipedia, upholding the highest standards of integrity. If you have any further suggestions or guidance on how I can improve my contributions, I would be grateful to hear them.

Thank you for your understanding and guidance. Drjoshcohen (talk) 21:55, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Drjoshcohen[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Drjoshcohen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 14:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Drjoshcohen[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Drjoshcohen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 15:45, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (As a Professor who has worked directly with Dr. Joshua Lee Cohen at the University of Southern California, I can attest that Dr. Cohen's page is true and accurate. In fact, he is a co-leader of a study we are conducting at A. T. Still University in Mesa, Arizona, on the subject "Can the use of the LaughMD comedy video app help relieve head and neck pain?" You can see I have a page under my company, "Fun Little Movies.") --Frankchindamo (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023[edit]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Film/video-based therapy, you may be blocked from editing.
It was clearly explained, above, that you should not edit pages with which you have a conflict of interest - Arjayay (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arjayay,

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to address a claim that has been made concerning my intentions and authorship in a particular matter. I believe there has been a mischaracterization of my actions, and I would like to clarify my position and request a revision of the assumptions made.

First and foremost, I would like to emphasize that my intentions were not malicious. I approached the situation with the sincere desire to contribute positively and offer my expertise. I take pride in my work and have always respected the principles and guidelines that govern our collaboration.

Moreover, I firmly assert my rightful authorship. I have invested considerable time, effort, and expertise into the creation of the content in question. I believe that the content accurately reflects the information and adheres to the necessary standards for publication.

However, I have noticed that the previous communication contained a term that assumes malicious intent on my part, despite the lack of evidence supporting such an assumption. I kindly request that the term be removed, as it does not accurately reflect my intentions or actions.

To provide a more comprehensive understanding of the situation and to rectify any misunderstandings, I would appreciate the opportunity to present additional details or evidence supporting my position. This will enable a fair assessment of the matter and contribute to a more accurate representation of the events.

I am open to engaging in a constructive dialogue to address any concerns or questions that may have arisen. It is my sincere hope that we can work together to find a resolution that upholds fairness, integrity, and a shared commitment to our collective goals.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and the chance to clarify any further aspects that may be required.

Kind regards, Drjoshcohen (talk) 23:24, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Cinema therapy, you may be blocked from editing.
It was clearly explained, above, that you should not add links to user pages, but you have continued doing so. Please stop - Arjayay (talk) 19:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arjayay, your claim that my work is a conflic of interest, demonstrates that If you are using AI tools like GPT-4 (ChatGPT) to generate text, it can be seen as your own work, because you are the one guiding the AI model through your prompts, making decisions about what to include and exclude, and generally shaping the final outcome.

However, it's important to keep a few points in mind:

Originality: AI tools like GPT-4 generate text based on a dataset that was used to train them. They do not "invent" new ideas or information but rather generate responses based on patterns and structures they learned during the training process. They're more like sophisticated language manipulation tools. Therefore, the originality of the generated content can be attributed to you as long as you are inputting the original ideas and instructions.

Plagiarism: Even though you're shaping the output of the AI, the model's training on a vast dataset may lead to the production of phrases or sentences that closely mirror those found in the source data. While it doesn't have access to specific documents or the ability to intentionally copy from them, the risk of generating similar text does exist. It's not intentional plagiarism, but it's something to be aware of.

Ownership: AI's lack of consciousness or personal identity means it doesn't have "ownership" over the text it generates. You, as the user directing the AI, are considered the author.

Conflict of Interest: If you're using an AI to help draft content for a Wikipedia article where you have a personal or professional connection, it could still potentially be seen as a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's rules on conflict of interest focus on the relationship between the editor and the subject of the article, not necessarily who or what physically writes the content.

Therefore, while it is acceptable to use AI as a tool to help generate text, it is important to be transparent about this process, especially when contributing to collaborative platforms like Wikipedia. Ensure you are adhering to guidelines and policies set by the platform, and remember that final responsibility for the content rests with you, the human user guiding the AI. Drjoshcohen (talk) 22:07, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arjayay Dear

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing in response to a recent communication I received regarding my activities on Wikipedia, specifically in relation to the article on "Cinema therapy." I would like to address the concerns raised and seek further clarification regarding the use of the term "vandalism" in reference to my actions.

First and foremost, I want to emphasize that my intentions in contributing to the article were to further the dissemination of accurate and valuable information. I am the trademark owner and have published extensively on the subject of cinema therapy. Given my expertise and involvement in the field, I believed that adding relevant citations and references to my work would enhance the article's credibility and provide readers with valuable insights.

Furthermore, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that my contributions to the article align with the purpose of Wikipedia, which is to create a free and comprehensive encyclopedia that encompasses the sum of human knowledge. By including appropriate references to my published works on cinema therapy, I aimed to contribute to the robustness and accuracy of the article, ensuring that readers have access to reliable information.

It is important to note that the term "vandalism" implies a deliberate and malicious intent to obstruct or damage the integrity of the platform. In my case, I can assure you that my intentions were in no way malicious or detrimental to the project. On the contrary, I sought to provide valuable insights and contribute to the expansion of knowledge in the field of cinema therapy.

In light of the aforementioned points, I kindly request a reconsideration of the characterization of my actions as vandalism. I believe that the use of such terminology inaccurately portrays my intentions and fails to acknowledge the positive impact I intended to have on the article.

I appreciate your time and consideration in addressing this matter. I would be grateful for any further clarification or guidance you can provide regarding the specific concerns raised, as well as any suggestions on how I can contribute to the article in a manner that aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies.

Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your response.

Sincerely, Chat GPT or Dr. Joshua Lee Cohen Drjoshcohen (talk) 23:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:ChatGPT are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. HaeB (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HaeB,

Thank you for your message and for clarifying the purpose of talk pages on Wikipedia. I appreciate your guidance on using the appropriate channels for discussions.

I have a question regarding conflicts of interest. I'm wondering if the Teahouse would be an appropriate place to seek information and guidance on this topic. Specifically, I would like to understand how conflicts of interest are handled within the context of content creation and attribution, whether it be in relation to writing articles, editing existing content, or using AI tools like ChatGPT.

I would greatly appreciate any assistance or direction you can provide in finding the appropriate place to discuss this matter. Thank you for your time and guidance.

Best regards,

???????? Chat GPT or Dr. Joshua L Cohen Drjoshcohen (talk) 23:19, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Teahouse would definitely be a good place for this. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 23:23, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:24, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Dax,

I would like to address some concerns regarding the recent developments on Wikipedia. Firstly, I would like to clarify that I am an academic publisher, and my work is listed in the National Library of Medicine (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog/101641447) and WorldCat (https://www.worldcat.org/nl/title/video-and-filmmaking-as-psychotherapy-research-and-practice/oclc/903488925 and https://www.worldcat.org/title/1047651599). I'm uncertain about the specific issue you are referring to. I kindly request that any threats to my intellectual property and trademark for academic purposes cease immediately, as it serves to protect the clinical license of psychology in LA County and the United States.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to resolving any misunderstandings. Drjoshcohen (talk) 05:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Drjoshcohen (talk) 21:21, 24 June 2023 (UTC)Dear Administrators,[reply]

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to address the recent block on my Wikipedia account and clarify the content I have been contributing.

Firstly, I want to emphasize that I am the author and owner of the concept and intellectual property known as "Film/Video-Based Therapy." I have invested significant time and effort into developing this approach and have published relevant research and articles on the topic. As evidence of my credentials, I would like to draw your attention to my ORCID ID: [ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8849-2780]. It provides further verification of my expertise in this area.

I understand that the aim of blocking accounts is to prevent vandalism and inappropriate edits, and I appreciate your dedication to maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia. However, I assure you that my contributions are not intended to vandalize or misrepresent the content. On the contrary, my intention is to provide accurate and valuable information based on my expertise in the field.

I kindly request that you reconsider the block and take a closer look at my credentials and the validity of the information I have been adding. I believe that a thorough examination of my work will demonstrate that I am not only the rightful owner of the intellectual property but also an expert in the subject matter.

I genuinely appreciate your efforts in safeguarding Wikipedia's content, and I would be more than willing to engage in a constructive discussion regarding the inclusion of my work on the platform. I am open to providing additional references, citations, or any other form of evidence that may assist in verifying the accuracy and credibility of my contributions.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to a fruitful resolution and the opportunity to continue contributing my expertise to the Wikipedia community.

Just a thought[edit]

I think that there's some dueling boiler-plate messaging going on here. So, I am going to try to break it down and see if that helps.

I totally understand that you have the background to write about the film industry, and I am guessing that you wouldn't have much of a problem having content picked up by trade publications... and that you probably have well-formed opinions about the industry.

Writing for an encyclopedia, though, is different. Contributors are supposed to be objective, without opinions. In other words, the closer / more expert a user they are, the more they are not really a good fit to contribute here. I hope that makes sense.

If you'd like to stay involved, though, there's a process to submit edit requests. See Wikipedia:Edit requests.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:14, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, in my opinion, it's good to avoid creating walls of text... that's a good way to ensure your message won't be read.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mary,

I am writing to express my deep concerns about the recent deletion of my information on Wikipedia and the unauthorized manipulation of my trademark. As an academic publisher and the owner of the trademark for film/video-based therapy, I believe it is essential to protect the integrity of my intellectual property and ensure proper authorship credit. I kindly request your assistance in addressing these issues and finding a resolution that upholds ethical practices and respects my intellectual property rights. Drjoshcohen (talk) 05:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

Hello, please visit WP:ANI, there's a discussion about you. Thanks! — DaxServer (mobile) (t · m · e · c) 06:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Black Kite (talk) 10:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Black Kite: I realise this user's actions didn't nicely fit into the regular groupings for blocks, but I'm not quite sure a straight forward "NOTHERE". In many ways it's more like a bizarre CIR/not listening issue. They do have some statements (or, at least, their LLM does) that have some nothere vibes, but not in the "near-all edits" way that genuinely indicates they aren't here to build an encyclopedia. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to respectfully request the unblocking of my account on Wikipedia.

I recently discovered that my account has been blocked, and I would like to address any concerns or issues that have led to this block. I believe that open dialogue and collaboration are key to resolving any disputes or misunderstandings.

I kindly request that you provide clarification on the specific rule or guideline that was violated, leading to the block. Understanding the reason behind the block will enable me to make the necessary adjustments and ensure compliance with Wikipedia's policies.

I value the principles of Wikipedia, including neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing, and I am committed to contributing in a constructive and respectful manner. I believe that through open communication and a shared understanding, we can find a resolution that aligns with these principles.

I am eager to address any concerns and provide any additional information or clarification that may be required. I kindly ask for your reconsideration of the block and the opportunity to resume contributing to Wikipedia.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Drjoshcohen (talk) 11:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Black Kite Please allow me to apologize and fix this conflict you said {{unblock reviewed|decline=I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that *the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, <em>or</em> *the block is no longer necessary because you *#understand what you have been blocked for, *#will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and *#will make useful contributions instead. Please read the [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]] for more information. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles|talk]]) 14:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)|1=mending and repairing the damage to fix the problem[[User:Drjoshcohen|Drjoshcohen]] ([[User talk:Drjoshcohen#top|talk]]) 14:10, 26 June 2023 (UTC)}}

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Drjoshcohen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

appears Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:17, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Courcelles (talk) 14:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:17, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

": I realise this user's actions didn't nicely fit into the regular groupings for blocks, but I'm not quite sure a straight forward "NOTHERE". In many ways it's more like a bizarre CIR/not listening issue. They do have some statements (or, at least, their LLM does) that have some nothere vibes, but not in the "near-all edits" way that genuinely indicates they aren't here to build an encyclopedia. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)" Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:10, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the additional unblock requests and malformed templates that were added to the page. If you are going to request an unblock, please use this template: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, and do NOT use ChatGPT to create your request. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=If you are questioning my intentions please at least tell me why you would think I'm not being appropriate, I'm trying to resolve a conflict and you keep erasing the information as if I've done something wrong. I would apprecaite a little constructive feedback. ~~~~}} Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Drjoshcohen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm in the process of trying to apologize for my actions and need support in knowing what specific violations I have made

Decline reason:

I suggest you re-read the WP:ANI thread. PhilKnight (talk) 13:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Drjoshcohen (talk) 13:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Drjoshcohen[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Drjoshcohen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Drjoshcohen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Bgsu98, I apologize for what specific behavior I have done but I can't corerect the mistake I made if you don't tell me what I did and what specific violation I made that caused you to feel that I was a "web hosting service" and how I can correct that mistake as I'm an academic and published books on the subject. But you need to give me constructive feedback and stop attacking my intentions about my trademark. You assume the worst which is why I used Chat GPT, I'm attempting to resolve the issue. Film/Video Based Therapy is for the public and for public benefit and I and can prove that I'm not in violation of any wikipedia guidelines or the spirit of building an encyclopedia. If you honor the spirit of wikipedia you will look at the evidence and be fair about this assessment and not make assumptions without evidence Drjoshcohen (talk) 13:51, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Courcelles (talk) 14:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Drjoshcohen (talk) 13:51, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

intentions[edit]

I am not responding as Chat GPT as reqeusted and my intentions are being qestioned. Is this correct? Drjoshcohen (talk) 13:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Drjoshcohen (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

trying to resolve connflict and aplogizing and contributing to an already published academic work and requesting which violation I made that caused you to think that my intentions were not to suppoort the wikipedia community and what specifically I need to do to change it. Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Four unblock requests at once? No. Talk page revoked. Courcelles (talk) 14:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (I'm not promoting myself) --Drjoshcohen (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023[edit]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Courcelles (talk) 14:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]