User talk:Ari T. Benchaim

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Joseph Mercola. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. [1] --Hipal (talk) 17:05, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hipal: Mercola's receipt of a PPP loan is an unambiguous and attested fact. It is attested by data from the Federal government. It is cited and referenced. It is not, in any conceivable manner, an NPOV violation or personal analysis. At worst, it's undue weight, which is hard to really assert when it's a single sentence in a longer article. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 17:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no. His business received the loan. The spamming and edit-warring over the info needs to stop, and we need to figure out why it belongs in a biography about the person. --Hipal (talk) 19:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By that rule, a good deal of the article (and similar articles) should be struck because he made his statements under the mantle of corporate personhood. But that's not how Wikipedia works, of course, just as we discuss official statements made by public officers under their personal profiles. This is a patently disingenous attempt to scrub information that is clearly of public interest, well-attested and referenced that you are somehow convinced is unfavourable to Mercola. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 19:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please review

WP:CIVIL and relevant policies/guidelines. ArbEnf applies to biographies. --Hipal (talk) 19:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

You're trying to apply the same approach at Sherri Tenpenny. I do appreciate that you have been much more civil. Thank you.

At this point, I'm unclear if you have a feel for the normal editing process and the

@

John E. James, Jim Justice, Danny Meyer, David Green (entrepreneur), John Katzman and Robin Vos, just to name a few. It is mentioned on the entry for the Poynter Institute. I think based on just this random sample, it is clearly established that such information is seen as 1) relevant, 2) not unduly negative. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:OSE

And let's keep any discussion on improving the article on the article talk page. My comment here was to make sure you are aware of the basic policies. --Hipal (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

Golden Sunrise Nutraceutical, Inc. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted

.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Golden Sunrise Nutraceutical, Inc. until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Bilby (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any specific examples of where the COI is? The editor you cite on the talk page had already been reverted, and their account blocked for violations of the usernames policy. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

Hello, Ari T. Benchaim. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

ALLO-715 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted

.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ALLO-715 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Cirton (talk) 20:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

His Google Scholar page suggest that he clearly meets WP:PROF

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&q=omotunde+e+g+johnson&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 Inamo11 (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1) This isn't the right place to make this point (put this to the AfD discussion page)

2) None of that is reliable secondary coverage. See

WP:SIGCOV. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 02:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I realize that this is not a genealogical website. There is no need to be RUDE. I have added 5 other source. Including one from Cambridge. Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy (talk) 00:22, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not being rude.

WP:NOTGENEALOGY

is the actual policy.

The sources are reliable, but very collateral to the person. I've done an AfD, let's see what others think. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 00:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the sources are reliable as you have just said, why nominate the page for deletion?? Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy (talk) 00:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Because being mentioned in
  WP:ANYBIO. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 00:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Perhaps you could aid me in making the page more relevant, by editing the article yourself?? Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy (talk) 00:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editing will not make a non-notable historical figure notable. If you think he was notable, then show why. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 00:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will also admit that i am relatively un-experienced in Wikipedia, so your help would be greatly appreciated Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy (talk) 00:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to i plead my case that he is notable?? Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy (talk) 00:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's

WP:ANYBIO

, the main guideline for people:

1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times; or
2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field;^[1] or
3. The person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary (e.g. the Dictionary of National Biography).

Which of these does Eustace meet? Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 00:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ari T. Benchaim,

If an editor removes a PROD tag, you can't re-add it if you disagree with their reasons. An article or file can only be PROD'd once and any editor can remove a PROD tag for any reason, good or bad. So, please do not do this again. If you disagree, nominate the article for deletion at

Hi Ari T. Benchaim, is it true that I cannot vote as this user stated?[2] If so, could you provide me with a link to a guide that talks about this? Thank you.--Mhorg (talk) 21:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @

WP:PNSD). You are not enjoined from 'voting', but your word as the page creator is going to mean fairly little. Just as my word would mean very little in the face of more experienced Wikipedians who might have better judgment and a better sense of what the rules mean. Second, you're welcome to vote, although it's not always a good idea. In general, voting is secondary to Wikipedians expressing their views of why, not if, an article ought to be deleted. Vote away, but article creators responding to every comment in favor of deletion is generally seen as more a nuisance than constructive.Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 02:39, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for you answer :) Mhorg (talk) 07:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to have offended you with the

B k (talk) 03:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bellow me and hunker down has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the preceding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween! '"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple. If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Bellow me and hunker down (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I hope the weather is wonderful on whatever planet you are, where it's Halloween! :-) Enjoy! Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 00:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ari T. Benchaim. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:38, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]