Alexandermproctor

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dr. Paul K. Hansma has been accepted

Dr. Paul K. Hansma, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 19:18, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Bone Score has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bone Score. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bone Score has been accepted

Bone Score, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

» Shadowowl | talk 10:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Alexandermproctor (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Bone Score is referring to a new medical procedure that is not an advertisement nor promotion of the procedure. The format and description of the new procedure is exactly formatted the same way as other similar procedures such as the Trabecular Bone Score https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabecular_bone_score or DEXA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-energy_X-ray_absorptiometry. The Trabecular Bone Score and DEXA, just like the Bone Score, are procedures that relates to physical health of bone. All sources that were cited in the Bone Score article are peer-reviewed and independent from any commercial entity. The categorization of the Bone Score article as an advertisement is incorrect and should therefore be unblocked.

Decline reason:

You have an obvious conflict of interest here; the only thing that creates a "bone score" is a device sold by a company you founded. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 16:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Alexandermproctor (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I see the definition of COI. Makes sense. However, there is no COI for the author of the Trabecular Bone Score article, who is the inventor and owner of the only company that creates the "trabecular bone score". The information available about this new procedure must therefore be published by someone who has no connection to the community actually performing the procedure, per the COI definition. How do I resolve this? How did the author of the trabecular bone score avoid the COI?

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:02, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The author of that article does not have a conflict of interest as he isn't the inventor (according to googling his name Gabriel Tirouflet) also googling Trabecular Bone Score inventor comes up as blank as to who invented it so I am doubtful that the author of this article is the inventor as you claim (just because he created the article doesn't make him the inventor/ owner of a company that sells "it" (as far as I can see from google there is only software that can be used to calculate trabecular bone score as it is not a product it is a measurement thus cannot be created by a company). Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Ah ok, so the author of the article isn't Hans. Makes sense. Hopefully someone will add their own article about the new procedure. Once a new article is published, what are the policies for editing/correcting/adding references? Would it also be against policy for me to do that?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandermproctor (talk • contribs)

"COI editors should not edit affected articles directly, but propose changes on article talk pages instead." COI last line of third paragraph. Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)