Talk:Gary Null

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Skip to table of contents

Please read before starting

Wikipedia policy notes for new editors:
A common objection made by new arrivals is that the article presents Gary Null in an unsympathetic light and that criticism of it is too extensive or violates Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (WP:NPOV) policy. The sections of the policy that apply directly to this article are:

Also of particular relevance are:

In short, there are certain topics and fringe viewpoints we should not be giving false balance to. See Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE) for more context on how Wikipedia deals with fringe views.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Business B‑class Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Skepticism B‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Alternative medicine B‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 Sept 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

NYDN

Red Pen of Doom: You don't have a talk page so I am talking here. Why is NY Daily News "never an appropriate source" when cited as a news item? I can't believe that. It's a newspaper. hello 03:11, 10 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian McGrady (talk • contribs)

THe NYDN is a salacious tabloid. We only use reliably published sources particularly for potentially controversial content about a living person. (and I do have a talk page, I dont have a user page.) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The article, and specifically the lead, present Null in WP:UNDUE light, not adequately positioning him as he is viewed by mainstream academic health researchers. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:20, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

hello 00:58, 11 May 2014 (UTC) it seems you would have Wikipedia share the obvious prejudice of prior (and current) editors of this article. Wikipedia ought not take the view of researchers, but bring to bear principles of objectivity to every subject. That would be like saying Mario Andretti fails because he cannot adequately engineer a race car. Null has a specific place that he has earned consideration due to his prolific and successful publishing track record in radio, print, and film. He is a proponent of health and wellness who has at times challenged establishment thinking, and at times advocated many tenants that establishment medicine holds dear -- that diet and exercise can make a person healthier.

He does have a Ph.D. from an accredited institution which was formed by other respected (Bard College, Swarthmore. and more) institutions, so I am not sure exactly about your argument. If he has a Ph. D. from an accredited institution and he discusses nutrition, doesn't that make him part of the establishment in a way? Kindly elaborate more specifically? hello 01:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Invitation for further participation in editing this page by the entire community

Template:BLP noticeboard

Per my comment at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Gary Null Article, I am restoring the article to status quo ante—that is, to the way it was before the flurry of edits (what, nearly fifty?) made without prior discussion by Ian McGrady. As I noted there, a very large number of changes were made, all aimed at slanting this article in a particular way, and sometimes accompanied by dubious, misleading, incomplete, or just plain wrong edit summaries that make it difficult to follow exactly what McGrady changed and his reasoning for so doing.

Particularly given McGrady's acknowledged personal interest in the article subject (and arguable conflict of interest), he would be wise to discuss his proposed changes to this article here on its talk page before engaging and further wholesale revisions.

I apologize now to the other editors who have partially reverted McGrady's changes or attempted to edit them back towards a more neutral treatment; I'm afraid that too much material was lost without discussion, and would likely stay that way if not caught now. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My revisions are not wholesale: I just undid an ENTIRE reversion. The article was being developed more fully. Just because I have an acknowledged conflict of interest, there is *nothing* in Wikipedia that says I CANT work on the article, moreover. (Find the passage that expressly forbids it.) The contributions are valid. Out of laziness, you'd destroy the work? More of this scorched earth behavior. hello 02:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Even if you didn't have a personal interest in the article's subject, there's an expectation that editors be prepared to discuss and defend major changes to an article. Frequently, this takes the form encapsulated in WP:BRD: edit boldly, get reverted, and then discuss your proposed changes. All of your edits are still in the article history; you need to figure out which of those edits are actually defensible, and make some calm, concise, specific proposals on this talk page. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there has been anything uncalm on my part - as you can see from the cadence of discussion, it is certain editors who apparently uncalm. hello 03:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)