Misplaced Pages

User talk:Edith Sirius Lee

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Doc James (talk | contribs) at 23:18, 1 August 2010 (better wording). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:18, 1 August 2010 by Doc James (talk | contribs) (better wording)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome!

Hello, Edith Sirius Lee, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!   Will Beback  talk  20:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Notes for myself

Krisanaprakornkit and his team studied only meditation practices that could be used in clinical settings. "Meditation as a part of religious or spiritual practice wasn't considered to be meditation therapy," he said. http://www.wellsphere.com/meditation-article/meditate-your-anxiety-away/369 Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 20:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

There were only two studies included in the review and only one of these two was about TM. See http://thediabeticnews.com/news/860.shtml . The only included study on TM seems to be http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6986134?dopt=Abstract . Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 19:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Considered for help User:JamesBWatson Edith Sirius Lee (alias IP 67.230.154) (talk) 00:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

This comment

In this edit you removed well referenced content stating "i.e., not found in the peer-reviewed version and only an interpretation against TM of a point already included.)". It is found on the page mentioned. Thus please restore the content. Also I would like to bring your attention to this ArbCom finding which this edit contravenes. Here is a copy of the peer review process used Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:14, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Please do not revert my talk page to previous version or delete information in it. The same point was raised in the TM talk page. So I improved my reply and moved it and in this talk page. Do not also intimidate me by mentioning possible sanctions that do not apply at all to me. Edith Sirius Lee (talk) 14:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Seeing how I have done neither one I am not sure what you are referring to. Please provide diffs when you make accusations. As for the rest consider yourself advised. Will return to the talk page and will not comment here further. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:10, 1 August 2010 (UTC)