User talk:PageMaster

Welcome

Hello, PageMaster, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

PageMaster, good luck, and have fun. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PageMaster says:

I am retired from the telephone company after 35 years. I do not have any connection with Efranat Ltd. I learned about GcMAF from browsing the internet. I became greatly interested in the subject and began reading everything I could find about it. This was a few years back. I read the Wikipedia listing for GcMAF and knew it was wrong because the human immune system makes it for a purpose. The human body is very efficient and does not waste energy on something (GcMAF) it does not need or use. The more I learned the more I became convinced that the human immune system used its GcMAF to fight diseases. So I decided to try it (GOleic) to prevent prostate cancer. I believe the paper published by Dr. Yamamoto on prostate cancer was never retracted despite efforts to get it retracted. But anyway, I was pleased with the results I got when using GOleic in spite of the negative press on it. In case you do not know GOleic is a legal supplement in Germany and is an injectable GcMAF product with Oleic Acid and Saline. So any hint that I have a conflict of interest is absurd. I just know more about GcMAF than most of you. Also since the Wikipedia listing for GcMAF is now mostly wrong and out of date, I am trying to provide current information to show its evolution. There is no question that Efranat Ltd is developing GcMAF as a new cancer cure and for viral diseases. We all need to follow this for our own sake. The general public does not need to be afraid of GcMAF.

Remember this article should discuses just the science of GcMAF. It references Efranat Ltd because they are the ones who performed a Phase 1 Clinical Trial using terminal cancer patients with an all natural substance. No one else has ever done this. This is very rare and practically unheard of for an all natural substance. GcMAF itself cannot be patented. The world needs to know that GcMAF is NOT all bad and I intend to make this known if the science department at Wikipedia is not run by a bunch of pharmaceutical shills.

Also your approved posting for GcMAF includes a reference to Efranat Ltd on this page. You did not ask them to justify why they mentioned Efranat Ltd in the same context as GcMAF. Double standard?

PageMaster (talk) 02:38, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi PageMaster. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing, which is mostly about health and medicine. Your edits to date are promotional with regard to Efranat. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, PageMaster. 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, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the 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 which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Comments and requests

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. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by our WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with Efranat, directly or through a third party (e.g. a PR agency or the like)? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it, and if that connection includes being paid to edit, please make sure you disclose that too. After you respond (and you can just reply below), I can walk you through how the "peer review" part happens and then, if you like, I can provide you with some more general orientation as to how this place works. Please reply here, just below, to keep the discussion in one place. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 00:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --PageMaster (talk) 06:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It contains valid and up-to-date information on the subject of GcMAF. The old post is misleading and out of date. It infers that further development of GcMAF is dead. This is incorrect. GcMAF is being developed in Israel by Efranat Ltd. The old post does not mention that a successful FDA registered Phase 1 Clinical Trial has COMPLETED on GcMAF. The old post infers that GcMAF has never gone through any formal clinical trials and has not been proven safe. This is incorrect now. The old post does not reference the results of this official completed clinical trial. The old post does not mention that GcMAF is now being looked at by the FDA and Efranat Ltd as a new treatment for RPP. I stand by my references and submit that they are reputable and reliable.

I am a newbie to Wikipedia and just started posting on GcMAF which is my specialty (no conflicts of interest). I did not delete the old post, just added to bring the information up to date. Then these 2 old timers jumped on me without me knowing really why. They did not question my information. ScienceWatcher did initially because I did not reference my information correctly. I corrected that and ScienceWatcher restored by corrected post. Look at the history and you will see that. I am willing to discuss the status and science of GcMAF with anyone, but these 2 old timers don't seem to be interested in the science. They don't want the GcMAF information up-dated for some unknown reason. I welcome this review so the truth can come out.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (November 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:PageMaster/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 20:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! PageMaster, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 20:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest, again

About this edit made an IP, that you acknowledged was made by you in this diff, in response to this request from me....

The note contains all kinds of "insider" stuff.

Please read Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest (medicine), which is specifically about medical/health articles in Wikipedia.

Please let me know your thoughts, when you are done reading that. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:19, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting funny. I have said on several occasions that I have no conflict of interest. I am a retired AT&T technical manager with 35 years in network operations. I have absolutely no connections to the medical industry. Being retired with time on my hands, I like to surf the web. It's amazing how much information on any topic you can find there. I am a reader of anything GcMAF. I discovered GcMAF by accident on the web and read the GCMAF Book. This peaked my interest and I began reading all I could/can find on GcMAF. So I have an above average understanding of GcMAF by now. You should know that if the immune system makes it, it serves a vital function. The body is the most efficient biological organism every created and does not waste energy on something with no purpose. GcMAF actually serves multiple purposes and has stand-alone functions independent of macrophage activation. So there is much more to the story yet to be revealed. I love a good evolving mystery, don't you. PageMaster (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly have not read the document at the link which talks about medical advocacy as well as financial conflicts of interest. Please read it and respond to what it says. Thanks. Jytdog (talk)

Interesting. I believe I have encountered you before. You seem to have something in common with your buddy who blocked my update. What link are you talking about. Please post it here and I will go to it for info. and respond if it asks me for something. I have nothing to hide concerning COI or financial ties. You should know that Efranat Ltd is a private company and sells no stock. I happen to know a little about GcMAF and think the GcMAF page needs to be updated with the latest info. I am just trying to add one sentence and you would think the sky is falling. It appears that some folks are trying to disparage GcMAF for some unknown reason. What are these people hiding?PageMaster (talk) 22:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your intenting. Please follow the conventions on intenting talk page threads - -see WP:THREAD. This too is part of working in Wikipedia and being part of the community and is basic as "please" and "thank you".

You are clearly an advocate for this experimental therapy and this is a fine thing to be out there in the world. Here in Wikipedia it is not OK to do this. This is discussed in the COI/medicine link above, and also in the WP:PROMO and WP:NPOV policies.

Your claims of being only a "fan" of the drug don't make sense in light of the insider information you stated in the link I provided above. That remains a problem but a lesser one that your advocacy. Jytdog (talk) 01:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Was the editor who added the sentence that Efranat Ltd was conducting GcMAF trials at a local hospital quizzed like this? If he can add his sentence why can't I add the sentence that in: May 2017 the U.S. Food and Drug Administraion (FDA) granted both an Orphan Drug Designation and a Rare Pediatric Disease (RPD) designation to Efranat Ltd to develop a GcMAF treatment for Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis (RRP). This is a statement of a cold hard fact and I have a third party reputable reference to backup the statement. This statement is bland and does not hint of COI or advocacy. It is a flat statement of a recent event that is now in the history of GcMAF. As I said, I know a thing or two about the subject and cannot be snowed easily. If I have a question on a related topic, I am not afraid to email someone for clarification. Most SME's have email addresses and don't mind discussing an issue with someone who asks an intelligent question. I email a lot of people and gather information. Please "undue" the block and post this cold hard unbiased fact.PageMaster (talk) 03:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You keep wanting to talk about other people. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right. I am trying to help you see what you are doing with your editing privileges. If you keep doing what you have been doing, you are going to have your editing privilges restricted or removed. You can take that seriously or not. Jytdog (talk) 04:22, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Point Taken. Now I need your help in improving the GcMAF page on GcMAF. I am asking for your help. Given the sentence above is a cold hard true bland fact without COI or advocacy from a reputable third party publication which would be of great interest to anyone wondering about the future of GcMAF, how would you word it better to meet Wikipedia standards? Feel free to change the wording and make the post for me. It would be greatly appreciated. I would like to see what a master can do with some raw new important information that sheds new light on the future of GcMAF. Show me what an experienced Wikipedia editor would do in this case so I can learn from you.PageMaster (talk) 16:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK so the "point taken" was the first sign that you are not a crazy person obsessed with beating the shit out of WP until you get your way. Unfortunately you went right back to it. I am not going to keep talking with you if you are going to just slide from trying to pile badly sourced promotional garbage like this into the article (and you have done lots of that as your contribs to the article show) to talking about "one cold hard fact". Your stance is very much "give me an inch and I will try to take a mile" and I have way too much work to do in the real world and in Wikipedia to spend my time continuing with a bad conversation. You need to see that you have been both behaving in a way that violates fundamental norms and policies in WP and adding content that does the same. Once you demonstrate that you are not another one of the many fanatics who come here and we end having to throw out of here, we can talk about the orphan designation and its sourcing. Jytdog (talk) 04:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note

So, Wikipedia, being the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, attracts many kinds of people. Many people come here driven by some passion.

We get sports fans who want to write about how great their favorite team is, people who live in a town who want to write about how great the town is, various kinds of engineers who happen to hate or love some particular technology, and lots of the "tinfoil hat" people who for example batter our page on Electronic harassment (those are the actual tinfoil hat people).

All of them behave exactly like you. They write about one thing. They ignore what experienced editors tell them about the policies and guidelines. They spin crazy conspiracy theories and threaten to go to "arbitration".

You are that guy. You are the American who goes to Paris and demands everybody speak English, and has a temper tantrum when they won't.

You can keep being that guy, in which I case I can assure you, that you will a) fail to affect any Wikipedia content and you will either b) leave here angry and frustrated or c) will end up indefinitely blocked.

Or you can start actually listening to what folks are telling you about how Wikipedia works, and perhaps you will learn how Wikipedia works.Jytdog (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:PageMaster/sandbox

Hello, PageMaster. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 08:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]