Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:10, 11 March 2016

This article was nominated for deletion on May 8 2012. The result of the discussion was delete.

The following Misplaced Pages contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Polaritytherapie (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. (WP:SPA for polarity therapy per contribs. Created this article. COI declared via username) Raphaelji (talk · contribs) This user has not edited the article. (COI declared here)

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

Contested deletion

Please do not delete this important entry about Dr. Randolph Stone. I am Raphael Schenker, actual president of the Polarity Association Switzerland, www.polarityverband.ch (more than 200 members). Together with the board of Directors of the German and Austrian Associations of Polarity we support this newly added infomation about Dr. Randolph Stone. Since Dec 2015 Polarity is in Switzerland officially, federally acknowledged as a method of complementary medicine. It is the job and duty of the association to provide adaequate information about this therapy method and its founder. So, again, we strongly recommend to support this information, since the actual page is only a (empty) reference to another page with doubtful content. I am available for discussion, here or via Homepage of the Association. Thank you. Raphaelji (talk) 15:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because Dr. Stones's method Polarity Therapy is a method of complementary medicine comparable to Craniosacral therapy, Shiatsu etc. which do have their pages. Countless Polarity Practitioners are working with this method all over the world. Links to their assossiations can be given easily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaritytherapie (talk • contribs) 12:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because there is more than one link:

   http://www.polaritynetwork.com/museum/dr-randolph-stone/
   http://www.digitaldrstone.org//
   http://www.polaritytherapy.org/

count as well. The links to a few Polarity Associations have been filled in in the mean time. If more is needed, it can be provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaritytherapie (talk • contribs) 13:04, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because Polarity Therapy is in need of a proper Misplaced Pages page in addition to this biography of its founder. The existent link to "energy medicine" is insufficient in its current state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaritytherapie (talk • contribs) 13:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted. Now of course the links to all the Polarity Associations would belong on a proper Polarity page. Since this does not yet exist and since I have to convince people that Dr. Stone has enough practitioners following his teachings throughout the world so his biography should not be deleted, I put them here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaritytherapie (talk • contribs) 13:35, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Additional References

More references and as required secondary sources have been given. Again, the latter would belong on a not yet existing Polarity Therapy page. Here they serve to illustrate Stones influence. More can be provided if needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polaritytherapie (talk • contribs) 14:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest tag

I've added a conflict of interest tag to this article. This signifies to readers that the article has been extensively edited by someone with a conflict of interest, and is likely to have bias, in the form of missing negative content, overemphasis on "positives", non-neutral language (all of which are violations of the WP:NPOV content policy), and is likely to have unsourced or poorly sourced content, in violation of the WP:VERIFY content policy. It is likely that the content promotes the subject of the article, in violation of the WP:PROMO policy. Independent editors need to review the article and correct it, and then may remove the tag. If you do so, please leave a note here. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

You've given no explanation for the COI or what it may be and I find your explanation above dubious. I don't see anything particularly promotional about this article. Kindzmarauli (talk) 17:12, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes I know that you don't, and that is somewhat troubling to me. I left a note on your Talk page and look forward to a response there. I replied to the note you left for me, on my talk page btw) OK, to depersonalize this I am going to open a discussion at COIN to get further eyes on this. I will provide a link there when that is done. Jytdog (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Done, Misplaced Pages:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Randolph_Stone. Jytdog (talk) 17:44, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

inappropriate content in Misplaced Pages

The following is not appropriate WIkipedia content, mainly because this is an article about Stone; not about "polarity therapy", so everything below is basically WP:COATRACK. there are other issues, but that is enough to remove this from the article. I have copied it here for discussion.

Scientific research on Polarity therapy

In the following articles criticism as well as approval on Polarity therapy is scientifically founded:

The International Journal of Behavioral Medicine (2010) assesses Biofield therapies including Polarity asking "helpful of full of hype?" and comes to the conclusion that there is a need for further high-quality studies in this area.

Global advances in health and medicine (2015) states that "research in human biofield studies including polarity therapy involving preclinical models promises a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying the efficacy of biofield therapies and will be important in guiding clinical protocols and integrating treatments with conventional medical therapies.

Journal of clinical nursing (2013): "Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue was the most used scale specifically for the evaluation of fatigue. Pretreatment fatigue level may be an important risk factor to aggravate it during radiotherapy and decrease the quality of life. Five studies proposed interventions, all of them involving nonpharmacological therapies: cognitive-behavioural therapy associated with hypnosis, moderate-intensity physical exercises, stretching programmes, yoga and polarity therapy. The studies showed good results in relation to fatigue, physical and psychological aspects, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: Early detection of fatigue, using appropriate scales, is relevant to propose suitable treatments and achieve better clinical conditions, adherence and continuity of radiotherapy treatment, aiming to ensure more effective responses."

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2014): "When respite care was compared to polarity therapy a significant effect was found in favour of polarity therapy for caregiver perceived stress (n = 38, MD 5.80, 95% CI 1.43 to 10.17), but not for other measures of psychological health and other caregiver outcomes."

Alternative therapies in health and medicine (1999): "The actual identification (let alone measurement) of "healing energy" has been elusive and controversial. Although healing energy has been defined as "subtle" and "undetectable," preliminary research indicates that these descriptions may be inaccurate. OBJECTIVE: To assess the fluctuation of extremely high-frequency electromagnetic fields, or gamma rays, during Polarity therapy treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests a consistent and dramatic decrease in the number of gamma rays measured in a subject's electromagnetic field during one type of alternative healing energy treatment (Polarity therapy). The authors strongly recommend the collection of additional data, especially on subjects with cancer, whose long-term survival might be enhanced as a result of the radiation hormesis effects of alternative energy therapies."

References

1. Jain, Shamini; Mills, Paul J. (2010-03-01). "Biofield Therapies: Helpful or Full of Hype? A Best Evidence Synthesis". International Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 17 (1): 1–16. doi:10.1007/s12529-009-9062-4. ISSN 1070-5503. PMC 2816237. PMID 19856109.
2. Yount, Garret; et al. (2015). "Challenges for Preclinical Investigations of Human Biofield Modalities". Global advances in health and medicine : improving healthcare outcomes worldwide, 4(Suppl), 52-7. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |first= (help)
3. Machado, Graziela; et al. (2013). "Fatigue related to radiotherapy for breast and/or gynaecological cancer: a systematic review". Journal of clinical nursing, 22(19-20), 2679-86. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |first= (help)
4. Lee, Helen (2014). "Respite care for people with dementia and their carers". The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 1CD004396.
5. Arnold, L E; et al. (1999). "Gamma radiation fluctuations during alternative healing therapy". Alternative therapies in health and medicine, 5(4), 51-6. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |first= (help)

- Jytdog (talk) 16:34, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Your deletions and templates are disruptive to an article at AfD. It gives a clear impresion that you're trying to poison the well by deleting valid content and adding COI tags to influence readers to vote "delete". As I said before, please WAIT UNTIL THE DISCUSSION HAS COMPLETED. THen we can determine what is and isn't a COI. Kindzmarauli (talk) 17:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

This is inappropriate content for any article, whether it is up for AfD or not. Please do not shout. The COI analysis is entirely germane to what is happening now. Jytdog (talk) 17:29, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Please do reply here, thanks! Jytdog (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

As I've repeated explained, your deletion of this content gives the impression of trying to influence the AfD. Is that what you want? Kindzmarauli (talk) 18:19, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

No, and your assumption of bad faith is making working toward consensus impossible. Jytdog (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving the independent sourcing tag. I will accept removal of the COI tag until we hear from that editor. I will accept retention of this section, but tagged it with "coatrack" to signal the problem. Hopefully we can agree on this for now. Jytdog (talk) 18:32, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Removed

I have removed this from my watchlist, the deletionists may now get it deleted to their heart's (or organ of their choice's) content. Kindzmarauli (talk) 21:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

• Articles edited by connected contributors