User talk:84.247.48.29

March 2020

Hello, I'm Erakura. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Allopregnanolone have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. –Erakura^(talk) 23:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Allopregnanolone. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. –Erakura^(talk) 23:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Why are you talking to me? I didn't make any edits to anything.

Regarding Allopregnanolone

Hello -- would you be willing to explain what the problem is with the article that you are seeing? The article does not appear promotional in nature, and I fail to see how "lives are being put at risk" by it. You are removing well-sourced content from the article, and thus your changes have been reverted. –Erakura^(talk) 23:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Are you serious? I’m documenting these interactions for a med course I’m doing, it’s an example of how random editors can be duped my marketing departments of pharma companies or possible stock brokers trying to influence share prices. The original article is about a naturally occurring neurosteroid allopregnanolone, in 2019 brexanolone was created. The article starts with claiming allopregnanolone is a medication before its a naturally occurring neurosteroid,does this not sound an alarm bell for you ? it then proceeds to speak about brexanolone in depth for 3 paragraphs before moving back to the natural allorpeganolone,brexanolone should be spoken about later in the article or linked as a separate article,it’s not natural and produced by sage a pharmacy company which means it has fillers so it can be used intravenously. This is science and it’s supposed to be exact, they are not the same. When you google allopregenanolone you are brought to this page,also when you google brexanolone your are brought to the same page,this is unethical and misleading. Is this article about the medication or the natural substance, if it remains the same we can just edit the page on thyroid to begin saying it’s a medication and link the page to thyroxine the medication ?

@84.247.48.29: If those are your concerns, then they need to be clearly articulated when you make the edits, or, when there's disagreement between editors, brought to the talk-page instead of engaging in an edit war. That's also going to make sure subject-matter editors see them, as opposed to vandalism fighters. If they're legitimate concerns, I'd recommend you open an Wikipedia:Requests for comment, explain the issues you see, and allow the process to work itself out. I'll tell you that randomly accusing editors of being "duped by marketing departments" because they're reverting edits made without consensus and without regard for policy isn't the path to go. ThadeusOfNazereth^{Talk to Me!} 00:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

@84.247.48.29: Please refrain from making uncivil accusations towards me or any other editor -- that is uncalled for and is not going to help your cause. If you have some kind of issue with the change that the doctor you have referred to as 'delusional' made (also completely uncalled for), then I suggest you ask him directly at his talk page: User talk:Doc James. –Erakura^(talk) 00:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

Your recent editing history 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

---