User talk:JaimeS

From MEpedia, a crowd-sourced encyclopedia of ME and CFS science and history
Jump to: navigation, search

Leave me a message[new][edit source][reply]

Flow cytometry and other images[new][edit source][reply]

I uploaded some images relating to flow cytometry, and Category:Abnormal findings contains many other research images that should possibly be used more. I find the image descriptions for the immunological findings from flow cytometry hard to follow so don't see myself using them. I only found the one study with it. ~Njt (talk) 10:23, June 27, 2020 (EDT)

Time zone setting[new][edit source][reply]

Hi Jaime. I am not sure where you are based but I think your time zone setting in your "user preferences" could be wrong or correct but still causing confusion. The time stamps sometimes look wrong at first because all get converted to EDT on talk pages, but the Recent Changes page shows your local time, so they don't match. That might explain recent confusion.

Also have got thought about creating a user page? It's a little confusing to tag you and see it appear as a red link. New users get pages created for them now, but that wasn't in place way back when you created your account. Njt (talk) 12:32, September 18, 2019 (EDT)

Guido den Broeder[new][edit source][reply]

User:JaimeS I would like to formally request a block on Guido den Broeder for all pages unless he is totally willing change his current pattern of behavior in general, and toward other editors, and resolve the four issues below. Also tagging User:Kmdenmark and User:JenB as active admins.

1. I thought perhaps there was a way forward with Guido but his recent post on my page indicates his total rejection of existing MEpedia:Manual of style, MEpedia:editorial guidelines, and MEpedia:Science guidelines and his intention to rewrite them then invite "friends" to join his takeover on MEpedia. Editors are expected to agree to follow these guidelines and he has at the moment said he won't. He has further removed an undiscussed suggestion of mine from MEpedia_talk:Manual of style, which is not allowed.

It is now impossible for me to assume good faith given he has described bad faith intentions. After have told him to quit harassing me and leave my talk page only, only for him to call him a stalker on User_talk:Kmdenmark#Notjusttired minutes later and request that I be banned site wide. From my talk page:

Manual of style

The Manual of style was in part created by editors that are no longer around, with random edits by you in between. I intend to change it to make it easier for ME patients to contribute, before inviting other ME patients to join this project. For now, just remember that the MoS is not mandatory, especially not on pages that are still work in progress. They are guidance, not policy. Allowing users to contribute in a style that they feel comfortable with has priority. Guido den Broeder (talk) 17:36, September 15, 2019 (EDT) - my reply here -User_talk:Notjusttired#Manual_of_style
Guido has deleted my request for a link policy entirely from the MOS talk page without discussion. 2. Assuming he does decide to agree to follow current policies and to negotiate changes rather than overwrite existing guidelines and deleting others' suggestions for changes, then I would like his number of rude comments,1, baseless accusations1 2 - including calling me a "stalker" only after I told him to stop harassing me and to not post on my talk page - and uncivil comments directed at various with including myself, but especially User:Malcx to be addressed.

3. The reverting of unread changes1 and resulting edit warring2 - repeated re-reversing of inappropriate edits (rrv) and the use of "copyedit" comments to mask reversing neutrality edits - with User:Malcx User:Pyrrhus and myself on "rival" ME patient charity ME/cvs_Vereniging here would also need addressing, although some of this might not occur again if he is unable to edit those pages. I have previously raised conflict of interest with him
4. Assuming that is done I request a permanent ban on editing

  • his user page, ("internationally famous", links to his chess scores, novel, imdb page, changes his page's category, etc) - changes/reverts continuing for at least 2 years now - 1 2 3 4
  • all Dutch charity websites - including the one he runs ME Vereniging Nederland, and ME/cvs Vereniging which he adds potentially false info to - especially given the constant reverting without reason, unsourced statements, conflict of interest edits, using self-promotion (dozens of links to wikisage, - both his) and adding unreferenced edits to other Dutch charity pages, claiming [

his charity ME Vereniging Nederland is the only ME charity, and reversing edits for neutrality,1 2, 3 4 with "copyedit" or "rvv" comments, MOS, reference improvements 5, citation needed and grammar. I have raised with him the conflict of interest in editing other Dutch patient charities than his own, including adding unsourced statements. He has responded by edit warring with myself and two others - even reversing "citation needed" and grammar edits. Of particular concern is the claim on his charity page that is it "the" ME charity of the Netherlands, when there are three. I have suggested ways forward -1 2, ways to rephrase, but to no avail - instead he has threatened me requesting with a "topic ban" unless I voluntarily cease editing Dutch charities, and a site ban.

So the issues being

  1. ignoring all guidelines and reverting edits that follow them
  2. uncivil behavior, and baseless accusations aimed at other editors
  3. unsourced, biased, self-promotional edits on multiple pages, reversing any edits that revert them, and reversing unread edits
  4. assuming those can be resolved then ban from his own page, and all Dutch charities to prevent access given this behavior has happened whenever he has returned to edit MEpedia

I am sorry that there are not any other solutions I can suggest other than to see if he is willing to change - with restrictions in place - or otherwise a permanent block. He has been asked so many times to follow our collaborative way of working, had a lot of explanation, and been asked for an explanation of the reverts but without any way forward. Thank your for the time taken to read and please let me know if you need more info. notjusttired (talk) 20:11, September 15, 2019 (EDT)


Thanks for the summary User:notjusttired and as I've mentioned elsewhere I support the block. As additional support I'd like to just say I think the overall level of rudeness to User:notjusttired has been the worst, showing a level of arrogance and unwillingness to cooperate that is simply not good for the community and quality of content on the site.
Guido also seems to think/act as if he authoritative and speaks for the whole community, for example telling me "Go away, we don't want you here." 1 ( I concede my following edit of {citation needed} to that was perhaps not the most grown up response :) .)
Malcx (talk) 21:09, September 15, 2019 (EDT)

Reply[new][edit source][reply]

  • As chair of GAME, I know many of the world's leading advocates and researchers. Some of them would be willing to contribute here if they could do that unhindered by not knowledgable editors with a Wikipedia warrior attitude, who think style trumps content. Guido den Broeder (talk) 12:54, September 16, 2019 (EDT)
  • User:notjusttired, if you want to be taken seriously as an editor at all, don't support and copy the vandals. Guido den Broeder (talk) 13:13, September 16, 2019 (EDT)

Slack Group?[new][edit source][reply]

Hi Jaime, sorry to bother you. I was just wondering if you knew whom I could ask about joining the Slack Group?
Many thanks!
Pyrrhus (talk) 22:13, 19 March 2019 (EDT)

Pyrrhus, drop me an email at! We need an email address to be able to invite you.

Thanks so much!
Pyrrhus (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2019 (EDT)

Request for adminship[new][edit source][reply]

Hi Jaime,

Could you upgrade my user rights group to administrator so I can deal with vandalism an harassment as displayed by user:Malcx who is not contributing anything to this project? We seem to have too few active admins, there hasn't been one online for days now. I have some 12 years of experience as administrator, bureaucrat and supervisor on various wiki's. Cheers, Guido den Broeder (talk) 12:33, September 16, 2019 (EDT)

The SPAM problem[new][edit source][reply]


You are have sysop-rights to the wiki, so i may point your Attention to the SPAM problem. cheers. --Metoo (talk) 03:40, October 5, 2021 (UTC)

bias Bias in research is "a systematic deviation of an observation from the true clinical state". (Learn more:

The information provided at this site is not intended to diagnose or treat any illness.
From MEpedia, a crowd-sourced encyclopedia of ME and CFS science and history.