User talk:CaptainManacles

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Dear CaptainManacles: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any dicussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Luna Santin 12:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Megavitamin therapy[edit]

Thanks for your help in this article. You'll note that your NPOV edit was wiped out by OM-supporters almost immediately. I've requested help at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-08-09 Orthomolecular medicine and related pages. -- Cri du canard 12:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of non-commercial links from Ayurveda#External_links[edit]

FRLHT is not a commercial organization. About the foundation:

FRLHT is a registered Public Trust and Charitable Society, which started its activities in 1993. The Ministry of Science & Technology recognizes FRLHT as a scientific and research organization. The Ministry of Environment and Forests has designated FRLHT as a National Center of Excellence for medicinal plants and traditional knowledge.

Had you considered this before you deleted the link from Ayurveda article? Raanoo 18:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seemed rather commerical to me. They do, for example, sell things. That it is a "registered public trust and charitable society" is irrelevent. It's obviously spam. It fits the same profile as the rest of the spam we've been getting on that page. The page in itself is not really informative. Compare it to the rest of the external links. CaptainManacles 22:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Earning money for self-sustainance is different from sole purpose of making profits. Likening FRLHT to a commercial organization is similar to calling ITU-T or IEEE or the universities a commercial organization, who do sell some of their recently published standards, who have paid memberships. Going by this logic, are we saying that one cannot refer these organizations at WP? Raanoo 04:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't address any of the points I made. Look, you're not fooling anyone. Your arguements only further betray your motives. "The Ministry of Environment and Forests has designated FRLHT as a National Center of Excellence for medicinal plants and traditional knowledge." Give me a break. If you want to push your website buy some ad space. It serves no purpose to the wikipedia community. CaptainManacles 07:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not really about what you think personally; but about policies of WP. Second, it is not 'my' Web site by any means; nor am I related to it by any ways. Advertising them is not my concern. The wording in the reply I received is somewhat of disrespectful, offending and not conformant with Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable. The relevance of the research they do for Ayurveda is something that is being overlooked in this conversation. They are doing some real work of preparing an information bank of geographical location of the medicinal plants. In absence of this, there remains a risk extinction of the plants. Why are we treating this as your opinion versus mine? Let us focus on facts and their relevance to the article under consideration. What's way out here? Can we consider some sort of neutral arbitration?

On a related note, it is surprising to see how blatant commercial listings in article such as Electric vehicle production go unnoticed and genuine ones get scrutinized. Raanoo 12:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swami Ramdev[edit]

I noticed you edited the Ramdev page. Firstly, thank you for editing in that maze of IP anon edis. Sometimes when I need to revert I have to go back like 10-15 diffs. Keep up the good work.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, I followed the guy's edit history when I saw he was spamming links. CaptainManacles 23:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]