| Revision as of 01:40, 5 May 2008 editFran Rogers (talk | contribs)8,995 edits →"Whitewash": new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:49, 5 May 2008 edit undoOrangemarlin (talk | contribs)30,771 editsm Reverted to revision 210043586 by Useight; Deleted using a fine automated tool, which saves me valuable time dealing with trolls..using TWNext edit → | ||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
| If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at ], as it has yet to have been moved into the Misplaced Pages namespace. Thank you for your help. ] (]) 04:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at ], as it has yet to have been moved into the Misplaced Pages namespace. Thank you for your help. ] (]) 04:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == "Whitewash" == | |||
| My recent edits to ] that you Twinkle-reverted were "whitewash" how, exactly? I was trying to integrate an overly tangential paragraph on a petition she signed and put it in better context with the rest of the article - the version you had reverted to seemed disjointed from the rest and somewhat ]. If you are going to revert on a sensitive ] like that, a further explanation is certainly in order. '''<font color="#ff9900">]</font><font color="#ff6699">]</font>''' 01:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:49, 5 May 2008
| No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
| FACs needing feedback view • edit | |
|---|---|
| 2007 Greensburg tornado | Review it now |
| Belvidere Apollo Theatre collapse | Review it now |
| Featured article removal candidates | |
|---|---|
| Boogeyman 2 | Review now |
| Shoshone National Forest | Review now |
| Northrop YF-23 | Review now |
| Emmy Noether | Review now |
| Concerto delle donne | Review now |
Watching Anti-Science POV admin candidates
- None for now.
Articles on Quackademic Medicine
Below are articles articles, mostly medical but some in the sciences, that promote ideas or POV's that might endanger human life. Feel free to add your own, but I'm watching and cleaning up these articles. Please sign if you add something.
- List of medicinal herbs-lacks any references, and implies these drugs can help.Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Herbalism-same as above Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Homeopathy-ridiculous Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Attachment therapy-don't let your children go there Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC) This has been rewritten since User:AWeidman (Dr Becker-Weidman) and his 6 socks were indef banned. Fainites 16:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Medicinal plants of the American West-more unsourced POV edits Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Alternative medicine-more of the same Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Naturopathic medicine-Actually not completely off the wall, but some parts are bad. Orangemarlin 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Er, Duesberg hypothesis and poppers could both use more work, and talk about endangering lives... especially the former. MastCell 18:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd also add ephedra to the list... I did a lot of work cleaning it up and it's not so bad anymore (it actually references the serious harms and deaths associated with ephedra supplements in a way that goes beyond referring to the FDA as jackbooted thugs, now). But much of the same material is duplicated in ECA stack, which I haven't been as successful with, and which I fear gives an erroneous impression as to the safety record of ephedra-containing dietary supplements. MastCell 19:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Arguably, Reflexology, though that's probably not actually dangerous, just ridiculously oversold. Adam Cuerden 00:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Vaccine controversy. Anti-vaxers are really dangerous. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hulda Clark. A dangerous scam. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Gary Null. Advocates nonsense. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Joseph Mercola. Advocates nonsense and repeated run ins with the FTC. -- Fyslee / talk 08:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- rebirthing, reparenting, Power therapies. Primal Scream therapy. I would treat Neurolinguistic Programming as the main hub for many of them though. Its a subject that seems to be the main pseudoscientific umbrella that is used by most of them to give the false impression of scientific appearance. Its incredibly widespread and extremely misleading to the less scientifically literate. Here is a good source; . Phloem (talk) 05:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- anyone who wants to work on this complex of article, I'll be glad to help. Time we got to the pseudo-psychology. DGG (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- try Eisner in The death of psychotherapy, Chapter 3 "Cathartic Therapies:From Primal to est". A little out of date but .... Fainites 22:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- coral calcium. I just put in some references, but there is a lot more that can be done. That someone would think that coral calcium can be used as a panacea for all types of cancer when in fact excess calcium can, in some cases, be detrimental to certain cancer treatments means that we should be very careful how the claims of the coral calcium fanatics are treated. ScienceApologist (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- Mannatech. An article about a company that purveys sugars, calling them health products (glyconutrients). Antelan 02:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Medical articles
Below are articles that I believe, along with any trusted science and medicine editors who may wish to contribute, meet the simple test of being well-written, do not give undue weight to fringe theories, and are either WP:GA or WP:FA:
Salacious talk of eye-candy on my page is not permitted..
Ye gods man, I am a pillar of the community and cannot be seen to engage in salacious talk of eye-candy, I mean really there are much better candidates than her....(cold shower, cough splutter...bbbbbbbbrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr).....if you like intellectual sci-fi you must have seen this though --> The Lost Room. highly recommended. :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
New Project
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.
If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Misplaced Pages namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 04:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)