User talk:Michael Ehrmant

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Michael Ehrmant, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! RFD (talk) 20:02, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources[edit]

Hello, thanks for your edits. However, some of the sources you have provided violate our reliable sources guideline, and have been removed by me and other editors. For example, the source you added to Solid ink is a blog. Graham87 11:32, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:43, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Refs[edit]

Some of your refs are simply spam. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Michael Ehrmant. Based on your edits to date, you appear to be editing Wikipedia for pay. I'm providing you notice of Wikipedia's relevant policies and guidelines.

Hello, Michael Ehrmant. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Comments and requests[edit]

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. Would you please disclose any relationship you have with subjects you have edited about to date? Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 03:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

since, instead of talking, you have not responded and instead restored all your spam links, I am opening a COI noticeboard case. Jytdog (talk) 06:22, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion[edit]

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 06:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Mean as custard (talk) 08:01, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution[edit]

Please do not file dispute resolutions when they are uncalled for. You have been inserting spam links, there is really no dispute about that. Please refrain from such activity in the future or I will report you to ANI. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 19:32, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Michael Ehrmant. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]