Talk:Gary Null/Archives/2014/February

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Burzynski connection

Gary Null is in part responsible for the early promotion of cancer quack Stanislaw Burzynski. This fact is IMO interesting, and it is reliably established:

A series of three articles co-authored by Null in Penthouse is credited by [[David Gorski]] with bringing the [[Burzynski clinic]] to prominence.<ref name="SBM">{{cite web | url=http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/stanislaw-burzynski-the-early-years-part-1/ | title=Stanislaw Burzynski: The Early Years | publisher=[[Science Based Medicine]] | date=July 2, 2013 | accessdate=February 20, 2014 | author=Gorski, David}}</ref>

Note that this does not rely on the authority of Science Based Medicine, dismissed by TimidGuy as a blog (but in actuality a project which has a reputation for fact-checking, is a reliable authority for discussion of quackery, and has an editorial board and internal review processes), but is stated as the opinion of Dr David Gorski, who is a noted authority on quackery and especially Burzynski. Gorski has a blog, it's not SBM. TimidGy's rejection of this source is a misreading of the sourcing guidelines; it is a statement of the opinion of a well known authority on the subject, attributed to a place that is authentically his writing, and which does not publish mere polemic. Original sources are cited in the article. It is an uncontroversial source for an uncontroversial statement. You could dispute its significance but not, I think, it's reliability. I think Null is actually proud of it. He's certainly never denied it, why would he? Guy (Help!) 12:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Anti-blog reactions are typically not very enlightened. Unfortunately, we have a problem with WP:COMPETENCE in certain editors (not yourself, Guy) in being able to see which blogs are reliable and which are not. Science Based Medicine is a fantastic source for Wikipedia. We should use it more. However, another technique is to look for the sources they source in the posting. That sometimes works; I'm not sure about in this case. In any case, I should note that I support your revert, Guy. jps (talk) 14:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)