User talk:Arpowers

Welcome! To Andrew Powers Talk Page

Keratoconus

Thanks for your message, and welcome to Wikipedia! Generally we expect encyclopaedia articles to report on the most common occurrences first, and then move onto the less common ones later. Wikipedia has no mission to promote something, as that would be contrary to its strong policy on neutral point of view. One of my reasons for reordering the sections was that as the text in the article is currently written, the section on Intacs makes reference to corneal lens transplants, which hadn't been discussed yet with the reordering you gave it. (And the section on riboflavin treatment makes reference to Intacs, so it needs to go after that.) However, I don't have any strongly held views on this—perhaps the sections can be reworded slightly to avoid the need for such precedence—so I have left a note on the talk page of an editor whose views and neutrality I respect. Hopefully he will stop by the article talk page in the next day or two and offer his opinion.

Thanks, and again, welcome! — BillC ^talk 03:39, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(As a minor request for the future, perhaps you could leave an edit summary with your edits, as it helps everyone see what edit you've made when looking at the article history. There is a page explaining it here. Thanks!)

Thanks for your message. You are not the only one who has showed concern about commercially-motivated edits to this article. In Wikipedia's terms, this is called a conflict of interest. That page I just linked contains helpful guidance on Wikipedia's policies in this area. In particular, it refers to the conflict of interest noticeboard, in which help can be sought from experienced editors in this sort of situation. If you would like to start a post there, I would be happy to add my opinion. —BillC ^talk 05:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a response to your message on the Talk:Keratoconus page. As a conciliatory gesture, would you be amenable to consider toning your comments down in it? This would definitely help start things moving. With regards to the ongoing dispute, Wikipedia offers various means for resolving disputes such as this, which, in their various guises, are not uncommon. The first stage is for people to engage in constructive dialogue on the talk page. I myself take no particular strong view on the issue under debate, and am prepared to offer to act as a go-between for the two sides here, if people will accept me. If not, then there are other venues I can direct you both to who may be able to assist. —BillC ^talk 16:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arpowers good post there on the "discussion" page for Keratoconus ! I use the word discussion very loosely there, because none of my question get answered by the Epi on "baddies". Anyway I would like to send an attachment in to you (as I don't think the others are dragging their feet giving Dr BW more time to carry on). Please let me know a quick way (with out further replies needed from me on this page) to send you an attachment. Thanks RH149.254.51.112 (talk) 01:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Boxer Wachler prod

Since Brian Boxer Wachler has already been at AfD you can't use a prod tag on it. And I suspect that a new AfD nomination would end in "keep" given the last one and the current trend to keep just about everything. Sorry. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Coup_de_sabre.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Coup_de_sabre.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Wright brothers, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. DC T•C 21:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Arpowers. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. DC T•C 21:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PageLines-Logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PageLines-Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:41, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Important message

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in COVID-19, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

—Paleo Neonate – 17:08, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 04:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Zaathras (talk) 04:41, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

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 below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. – bradv^🍁 05:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]