Revision as of 03:47, 20 March 2022 editTgeorgescu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users55,118 edits →Discretionary sanctions: You have not been sanctioned yet← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:50, 20 March 2022 edit undoTgeorgescu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users55,118 edits →Yes. We are biased.: simply report what scientists have publishedNext edit → | ||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
:In your view, is a bias toward science a bias toward rationalism? ] (]) 03:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC) | :In your view, is a bias toward science a bias toward rationalism? ] (]) 03:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC) | ||
::This is not a forum for rational debates. Misplaced Pages is a machine for crunching references to ] that speak for themselves. It is not a university and not a scientific research institute. We do not perform research, but simply report what scientists have published. ] (]) 03:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC) | |||
{{reflist-talk}} | {{reflist-talk}} |
Revision as of 03:50, 20 March 2022
Welcome!
Hello, Reasoned Inquiry, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Talk:Electromagnetic hypersensitivity does not conform to Misplaced Pages's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Misplaced Pages articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.
There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Contributing to Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! tgeorgescu (talk) 02:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Discretionary sanctions
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- I am confused. I have no interest in the categories of pseudoscience, fringe science or complementary and alternative medicine. I'm interested in very select topics, one of them being the electromagnetic hypersensitivity syndrome page. I'm new here and would like to know why I got sanctioned. I have no idea what happened. Reasoned Inquiry (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- In fact, I couldn't be more pro-science. I am a rationalist at heart in every way I can be. That is the spirit I try hard to bring to every topic I like to discuss. If there was something I did to deserve sanctions, please don't hesitate to tell me so I don't violate your principles in the future. Thank you. Reasoned Inquiry (talk) 03:09, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- You have not been sanctioned yet. I'm not an admin, so technically I cannot sanction you.
- Generally speaking, Misplaced Pages takes the medical orthodoxy at face value. This is not a forum for debates, see WP:NOTFORUM. tgeorgescu (talk) 03:47, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes. We are biased.
Jimmy Wales, founder of Misplaced Pages, once wrote:
Misplaced Pages's policies ... are exactly spot-on and correct. If you can get your work published in respectable scientific journals – that is to say, if you can produce evidence through replicable scientific experiments, then Misplaced Pages will cover it appropriately.
What we won't do is pretend that the work of lunatic charlatans is the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.
So yes, we are biased.
- We are biased towards science, and biased against pseudoscience.
- We are biased towards astronomy, and biased against astrology.
- We are biased towards chemistry, and biased against alchemy.
- We are biased towards mathematics, and biased against numerology.
- We are biased towards medicine, and biased against homeopathy.
- We are biased towards venipuncture, and biased against acupuncture.
- We are biased towards solar energy, and biased against esoteric energy.
- We are biased towards actual conspiracies and biased against conspiracy theories.
- We are biased towards cargo planes, and biased against cargo cults.
- We are biased towards vaccination, and biased against vaccine hesitancy.
- We are biased towards magnetic resonance imaging, and biased against magnetic therapy.
- We are biased towards crops, and biased against crop circles.
- We are biased towards laundry detergent, and biased against laundry balls.
- We are biased towards augmentative and alternative communication, and biased against facilitated communication.
- We are biased towards water treatment, and biased against magnetic water treatment.
- We are biased towards mercury in saturated calomel electrodes, and biased against mercury in quack medicines.
- We are biased towards blood transfusions, and biased against blood letting.
- We are biased towards electromagnetic fields, and biased against microlepton fields.
- We are biased towards evolution and an old Earth, and biased against young Earth creationism.
- We are biased towards holocaust studies, and biased against holocaust denial.
- We are biased towards an (approximately) spherical earth, and biased against a flat earth.
- We are biased towards the sociology of race, and biased against scientific racism.
- We are biased towards the scientific consensus on climate change, and biased against global warming conspiracy theories.
- We are biased towards the existence of Jesus and biased against the existence of Santa Claus.
- We are biased towards geology, and biased against flood geology.
- We are biased towards medical treatments that have been proven to be effective in double-blind clinical trials, and biased against medical treatments that are based upon preying on the gullible.
- We are biased towards astronauts and cosmonauts, and biased against ancient astronauts.
- We are biased towards psychology, and biased against phrenology.
- We are biased towards Mendelism, and biased against Lysenkoism.
And we are not going to change. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- In your view, is a bias toward science a bias toward rationalism? Reasoned Inquiry (talk) 03:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- This is not a forum for rational debates. Misplaced Pages is a machine for crunching references to reliable sources that speak for themselves. It is not a university and not a scientific research institute. We do not perform research, but simply report what scientists have published. tgeorgescu (talk) 03:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
References
- Farley, Tim (25 March 2014). "Misplaced Pages founder responds to pro-alt-med petition; skeptics cheer". Skeptical Software Tools. Archived from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- Hay Newman, Lily (27 March 2014). "Jimmy Wales Gets Real, and Sassy, About Misplaced Pages's Holistic Healing Coverage". Slate. Archived from the original on 28 March 2014. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- Gorski, David (24 March 2014). "An excellent response to complaints about medical topics on Misplaced Pages". ScienceBlogs. Archived from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- Novella, Steven (25 March 2014). "Standards of Evidence – Misplaced Pages Edition". NeuroLogica Blog. Archived from the original on 20 October 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- Talk:Astrology/Archive 13#Bias against astrology
- Talk:Alchemy/Archive 2#naturalistic bias in article
- Talk:Numerology/Archive 1#There's more work to be done
- Talk:Homeopathy/Archive 60#Misplaced Pages Bias
- Talk:Acupuncture/Archive 13#Strong Bias towards Skeptic Researchers
- Talk:Energy (esotericism)/Archive 1#Bias
- Talk:Conspiracy theory/Archive 12#Sequence of sections and bias
- Talk:Vaccine hesitancy/Archive 5#Clearly a bias attack article
- Talk:Magnet therapy/Archive 1#Contradiction and bias
- Talk:Crop circle/Archive 9#Bower and Chorley Bias Destroyed by Mathematician
- Talk:Laundry ball/Archives/2017
- Talk:Ayurveda/Archive 15#Suggestion to Shed Biases
- Talk:Torsion field (pseudoscience)/Archive 1#stop f**** supressing science with your bias bull****
- Talk:Young Earth creationism/Archive 3#Biased Article (part 2)
- Talk:Holocaust denial/Archive 12#Blatant bias on this page
- Talk:Flat Earth/Archive 7#Disinformation, the EARTH IS FLAT and this can be SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. This article is not about Flat Earth, it promotes a round earth.
- Talk:Scientific racism/Archive 1#THIS is propaganda
- Talk:Global warming conspiracy theory/Archive 3#Problems with the article
- Talk:Santa Claus/Archive 11#About Santa Claus
- Talk:Flood geology/Archive 4#Obvious bias
- Talk:Quackery/Archive 1#POV #2
- Talk:Ancient astronauts/Archive 4#Pseudoscience