Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:26, 5 July 2015

The good article status of this article is being reassessed by the community to determine whether the article meets the good article criteria. Please add comments to the reassessment page.

Gabor B. Racz has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: December 1, 2014. (Reviewed version).

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Medicine: Society Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States: Texas Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Mid-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Hungary Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Gabor B. Racz appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 April 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that Gabor Racz fled Budapest in 1956 after the Hungarian revolution and went on to hold a million-dollar endowed chair in anesthesiology at Texas Tech? A record of the entry may be seen at Misplaced Pages:Recent additions/2014/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gabor B. Racz.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gabor B. Racz article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gabor B. Racz/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 08:50, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

• I propose to take on this review and will make some detailed comments on the article in the next couple of days. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:50, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

First reading

• "He attended Semmelweis University Medical School in 1956 during the time of the Hungarian Revolution against Soviet occupation." - It would be better to say that he was attending the medical school at the time of the Soviet invasion.
• You should avoid the words "persecution" (NPOV) and "unexpected" (peacock) and just state the facts.
• Was he married to Enid at the time of the escape or did they marry later? The article implies the former.
• "He served as organizing Chairman of the Department of Anesthesiology at TTUHSC from 1977 to 1999," - This has already been stated at the beginning of the section and is repeated in paragraph 4.
• "The procedure involves the injection of a 3% phenol solution via the C7 approach under fluoroscopy." - This sentence is too jargon-laden.

In general the prose is of a high quality. My main concern is that the article reads as if it was written not by a neutral observer but by someone too close to the subject. That's all for now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth - thank you for taking the time to review this article. Please rest assured, there is no closeness to the subject on my part. In fact, I have a much closer relationship to some of the fish I've written about. My responses to your list of concerns follows:

• • It would be better to say that he was attending the medical school at the time of the Soviet invasion. - Actually, it would not be correct because Hungary fell to Soviet occupation during World War II. See the FA, Hungarian Revolution of 1956, wherein it states that it "was a spontaneous nationwide revolt against the government of the Hungarian People's Republic and its Soviet-imposed policies."

It was the tense of the verb that I was referring to. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth - My apologies. I misunderstood your suggestion. Thank you for clarifying. ✅

• • You should avoid the words "persecution" (NPOV).... - After I read some of the resources about the revolution, and also, Hungarian Revolution of 1956, which included statements such as, "Thousands were arrested, tortured, tried, and imprisoned in concentration camps, deported to the east, or were executed,...", I felt "escaped persecution" was a well stated fact. I hope you will reconsider removal. I did remove "unexpected" per your suggestion.

As far as I could make out, he wasn't persecuted, but thought he was likely to be. I still see "unexpected" in the article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I see you're point. Hopefully, it is fixed now. I also added a couple of new inline citations to validate the change. Re: "unexpected" - I forgot to save the correction. Gotta remember to order some Prevagen. ✅

• • Was he married to Enid at the time of the escape.... - Article states..."a young Racz and his wife, Enid, escaped...", so yes, they were married. Is there a better way I could have phrased it?

I just thought that as she was only 17 at the time of the escape, they might have married subsequently. The point is unimportant. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

• • He served as organizing Chairman of the Department of Anesthesiology.... - I fixed it, and tightened up the prose a bit. ✅
  • The procedure involves the injection of a 3% phenol solution... - Fixed. ✅Atsme☯ 03:47, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

GA criteria

• The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout.
• The article uses reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
• The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
• The article is neutral.
• The article is stable.
• The images are relevant and have suitable captions and are properly licensed.

• Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

COI

Per box at the top of this page, an editor appears to have a COI with regard to the subject of this article. The article need to be reviewed for NPOV and sourcing. Once the article is cleaned by an independent editor, the tag can be removed. If you do that, please leave a note here. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

This is nothing short of harassment. Be prepared to go to ANI. Atsme 23:09, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Please see Misplaced Pages:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Atsme.2C_Earthwave.2C_WP:SELFCITE.2C_Gabor_B._Racz I won't be interacting with you further on this, except to reply once at these various talk pages. Jytdog (talk) 00:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Make that ARBCOM. Atsme 03:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

CV

A few things in this article are sourced to source given as:

• Paula Brashear (March 31, 2008). "CURRICULUM VITAE Gabor B. Racz, M.D. Ch.B. DABPM, FIPP". TTUHSC International Pain Institute. Retrieved April 1, 2014.

But on inspection this looks like the subject's CV hosted on a make-your-own-magazine site. Is that right? Alexbrn (talk) 04:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

COI

User:Jytdog, I see you tagged this as COI. I think it's incumbent on you to explain that. It's not obvious to me why User:Atsme has a COI, and to add the tag without reason isn't WP:AGF Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

In the section above, I noted that the explanatory links are in the box at the top of this page (the "connected contributor" section at the bottom of box). I did explain. Jytdog (talk) 05:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

hm - the facebook link is now broken; she must have taken the post down. Well, it was there, and I saved a screencap is case that would be needed. It was on earthwave society's facebook page and it said: "Gabor B. Racz, M.D. - his Misplaced Pages biography is now complete" and had a link to this WP article. It was dated April 14, 2014. I've asked Atsme at COIN (linked in the COI section above) what the connection between Earthwave and Racz is. No answer to that yet. i'm kind of willing to assume that she was using that facebook page as more of a personal blog rather than as news relevant to the organization... but only kind of, in light of the undisclosed COI editing discussed in the COIN thread. Jytdog (talk) 05:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

User:Jytdog, thanks for that. I have to say that I still have concerns that it looks like outing, and I'm not sure that it's a positive move given the history between some editors, including yourself, and this user (just stating a fact, not commenting on the rights and wrongs here). I think that there are some valid concerns with this article, although it was passed for GA by a an experienced independent editor, but the language issues at least are easily fixable. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey Jim. I thought carefully about the OUTING issues and I believe what I have done is in-bounds. I understand that others might think differently and am open to hearing about that. As I reckon you know, the reason across all institutions that people with a COI are obligated to disclose it, is so that reviewers/readers are aware that there might be bias or promotional goals. This article is pretty promotional and I don't reckon it will look much like it does now after WP:MED editors review it. I am not going to do that now, but will do it later when the dust settles from this, if others haven't done it first. And I very much hear you on the bad history between Atsme and me. I am trying (not very successfully) to stay out of this, now that I have raised it. Jytdog (talk) 06:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Jytdog, I think there is a difference between claiming a COI and effectively outing an editor who denies at least a current COI. It looks worse when you tag a featured article like American paddlefish as COI. For the life of me, I cannot see how the claimed COI detracts from an FA article about a fish, which has been assessed at WP:FAC by many experienced editors. To tag everything User:Atsme has done as COI without clarifying how the claimed COI affects the veracity of the article looks like WP:POINT or settling scores. I invite you to reconsider which of the articles you have tagged are actually affected by the claimed COI, otherwise I'll remove the tags myself where it looks like bullying rather than being relevant. So far, I've only checked the fish, but that's such a poor decision, I think you should look at all those you believe have been adversely affected by the COI to check that that is really the case. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm happy to continue the discussion, but is this a discussion to have on an article Talk page? Five quick responses though. I have not tagged everything she has done and I don't know why you would say that. On the fish articles, the COI is not about the subject matter, but use of sources and ELs to promote her organization (this happens all the time); on this article, there appears to be some relationship between Atsme/Earthwave and this doctor, due to a) the facebook posting and b) the promotional tone of this article. You don't seem to have read the COIN thread nor seen the community's reaction to using her ELs in 2011 when Atsme did disclose the relationship; disclosure matters. And finally, there is no OUTING; she disclosed the relationship here in WP. Jytdog (talk) 17:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Reads like an advert

This article is full of peacock language. For example:

• "He has pioneered procedures and designs"
• " and pioneered what became known as the Racz procedure, which has been recognized internationally as a substantial advancement in the treatment for lysis"
• "many prestigious honors and awards"
• " innovative work with nerve stimulators"
• This is not supported by the reference "Developments in the lysis of adhesions technique by Racz and his colleagues resulted in the treatment of many patients suffering from failed back and neck surgery and spinal stenosis without the need for additional surgery"
• "In 1982, Racz pioneered what became known as the Racz Catheter procedure"
• This ref is broken
• this content is not supported by the ref provided "Racz designed and patented the Racz Catheter, a flexible, spring-wound"
• "Racz is internationally recognized for procedural advancements"
• And than it appears to contain copyright infringement such as "Racz has published numerous book chapters and journal articles describing his techniques in spinal cord and peripheral nerve stimulation, neurolysis, radiofrequency thermocoagulation and other interventional procedures used in management of pain." from have removed in this edit

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Talking about peacock, let's compare it to David Gorski, ok? Gorski's article, "Blockade of the vascular endothelial growth factor stress response increases the antitumor effects of ionizing radiation", characterizing the effects of angiogenesis inhibitors on the effectiveness of anti-tumor therapies has been cited over 900 times according to PubMed. And how about this one that isn't even cited, The article, Regulation of angiogenesis through a microRNA (miR-130a) that down-regulates antiangiogenic homeobox genes GAX and HOXA5 by Gorski and Yun Chen, into the use of microRNA to regulate angiogenesis led to research by Jason E. Fish's group at the University of California, San Francisco, into the use of microRNA to regulate blood vessel development, limiting tumor growth.? Some of the cited sources there need attention, too. Let's collaborate over there first, and then we can come back here and fix this article so we have uniform consistency throughout the encyclopedia regarding BLPs on medical doctors. Atsme 17:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Not once is Gorski referred to as a "pioneer" or an "innovator" or "internationally recognized"

That article is much more low key. And is not a GA Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Copy and paste

Our article says

"In October 2012, Racz received a lifetime achievement award for the nation's leading physician in international pain management from the New York/New Jersey Societies of Interventional Pain Physicans at their Symposium held in Jersey City, New Jersey."

Ref says

"lifetime achievement award for the nation’s leading physician in interventional pain management from the New York /New Jersey Societies of Interventional Pain Physicians at their October 19-21, 2012 Symposium held in Jersey City, New Jersey."

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

More poorly supported text

We say "Groundbreaking ceremonies for the new $4.3 million, 12,700 square feet (1,180 m2) Messer-Racz International Pain Center on the TTUHSC campus took place on June 13, 2005. Construction was completed in December 2008. According to Texas Tech Today, the center was named for Gene and Carlene Messer, who made a generous donation to the project, and for Gabor B. Racz." Only the last sentence is supported by the ref provided Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Other issues

• There's also nothing about the company he started: "In 1985, Epimed International originated in Lubbock, TX by Gabor J. Racz, in an effort to promote the Racz® Catheter"
• References for the Racz catheter, Racz procedure, and complex regional pain syndrome are not MEDRS-compliant
• The Racz procedure is also known as "epidural neurolysis", "epidural neuroplasty", and "percutaneous adhesiolysis" but that's not in the article
• The article lead says "substantial advancement in the treatment for lysis of adhesions" but the treatment is "lysis of adhesions"
• The article says " has also resulted in new Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and multiple insurance approvals affecting interventional pain management treatments in clinics across the country." A brief search indicates that the Racz procedure is still considered experimental, at least by insurance companies, (I know they're not great sources)

I'm not sure that this article should have received a GA designation at least based on the lack of MEDRS sources. Should this article's GA designation be reassessed (or delisted), individually or by the community, or should we attempt to fix the article and then possibly reassess? Thanks. Ca2james (talk) 17:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Have started the GAR here Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Rather than simply criticize the sources, why don't you identify which sources you believe do not meet RS? Oh, and don't forget those situations when WP:MEDRS criteria is malleable and that we can also apply WP:IAR when sources are limited. My mentor at the time, User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah, helped me with the sourcing and getting the article ready for DYK and GA. And since we are now collaborating on medical articles and BLPs, there are other articles waiting in the wings you can help with. I already mentioned David Gorski which is the article I modeled this one after. It has some pretty serious issues like this one. Looks like maybe I picked the wrong role model. Anyway, what I like most about writing BLPs for promotion to FA is that criteria expects the prose to be "engaging" unlike the the dry scientific approach we see far too often. Engaging prose makes the information much more palatable and likely to be read. If my friend hadn't told me about Racz and his work with CRPS, I never would have known such a problem existed. In addition to her own issues with CRPS which she developed from an infected dog bite, she told me about celebrities who also suffer with the syndrome, . Oh, and while we're on the subject of BLPs, there's also an article about a doctor Guy suggested I work on to bring to GA status, Peter_Wilmshurst, so there's another article we can collaborate on. There's also one I have on my list of potential "doctor" articles another friend told me about, Francis Robicsek who I'm pretty sure passes GNC. I guess as we get older, we become more aware of doctors. I am so looking forward to collaborating with medical experts. Atsme 18:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I identified the topics for which the sourcing did not meet MEDRS, which should be enough. Celebrities apparently suffering from a syndrome does not mean the syndrome exists - see Morgellons. Ca2james (talk) 18:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't want to speak out of school, but if my memory serves, there is a way to detect or confirm the condition by measuring bone rotation. I haven't done the research or gotten that detailed into CRPS because this is a BLP. I don't consider myself qualified to write full-blown medical articles and have no intention of doing so. I prefer to leave that for the experts, but when it comes to BLPs, I am quite comfortable with my ability to do a good job. Also, there are no copyright issues in this article. When this article was reviewed for GA, the Duplication Detector tool was used and there were no copyright violations detected. I've already been over this with reviewers. You deleted 3 paragraphs of my work stating in the edit summary that it was a copy and paste from http://www.worldinstituteofpain.org/site/pages.php?pageid=47. The only thing used verbatim from the source you named in the edit summary was the following statement: Racz has published numerous book chapters and journal articles describing his techniques in spinal cord and peripheral nerve stimulation, neurolysis, radiofrequency thermocoagulation and other interventional procedures used in management of pain. The other two paragraphs were compiled from information in his Curriculum Vitae which is what the World Institute of Pain article actually mirrored. Both sources were authored by Paula Brashear (secretary to Dr. Racz). Inclusion of that material is perfectly acceptable per BLP as a self-published source. You might also want to read regarding fair use. I'm going to restore the material and change the wording of that one sentence since you seem concerned about it. Atsme 19:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

1. "Gabor B. Racz, MD, FIPP, DABIPP". World Institute of Pain. Retrieved April 4, 2014.

• Good article reassessment nominees
• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Natural sciences good articles
• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• GA-Class biography articles
• GA-Class biography (science and academia) articles
• Low-importance biography (science and academia) articles
• Science and academia work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• GA-Class medicine articles
• Low-importance medicine articles
• GA-Class society and medicine articles
• Mid-importance society and medicine articles
• Society and medicine task force articles
• All WikiProject Medicine pages
• GA-Class United States articles
• Low-importance United States articles
• GA-Class United States articles of Low-importance
• GA-Class Texas articles
• Mid-importance Texas articles
• WikiProject Texas articles
• WikiProject United States articles
• GA-Class Hungary articles
• Low-importance Hungary articles
• All WikiProject Hungary pages
• Misplaced Pages Did you know articles