|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pressure point article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 NPOV
- 2 Partial list with anatomical reference
- 3 Merge
- 4 Reliable Sources and Citations Are Needed
- 5 Major re-write
It appears that some sections of this article are written without proper NPOV. It seems as though in some cases, hostility is directed at those who misunderstand the concept. I am referring here to the use of all capital letters and other elements of tone. This needs to be edited to reflex an appropriate encyclopedic style. JWAbrams (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Partial list with anatomical reference
- Brachial artery
- External carotid artery
- Femoral artery
- Peroneal artery
- Popliteal artery
- Dorsalis pedis artery
- Radial artery
- Superficial temporal artery
- Ulnar artery
- Axilla or Armpit:
- Brachial plexus:
- Common peroneal nerve:
- Femoral nerve:
- Infraorbital nerve:
- Mastoid process:
- Metatarsal peak:
- Radial nerve:
- Solar plexus:
- Suprasternal notch (also known as jugular notch):
- Talus bone:
- Ulnar nerve:
DO NOT MERGE. There have been several attempts to merge this article or to divert it. This is wrong - as acupuncture points are only a subset of pressure points. If you read the article you will see this. Therefore, DO NOT MERGE. ThirteenthGreg 06:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
There are two indentical articles about pressure points can this one be delted as the other has more and up to date information or redirection to this or the other article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC) Please provide a linkThank you--126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I am not agrea. During my studies in Shaolin we studied dianxue. Acupuncturepoints are the same as dianxue! The only difference is that in this article we have not yet got prosessed the real idea of pressurepoints. We are confused about nerves, bones and tendones. Acupuncturepoints are the point we are writing about. I chalange you all. Show me a point who is not a acupuncturepoint! See www.shaolinqinna.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Reliable Sources and Citations Are Needed
There have been so many bit-edits over the last few months, and vandalism, that the article lost its flow. Also it was almost completely unreferenced. I have thus rewritten much of it, making repairs, updating content, adding references - hopefully it's a better and more reliable read. To make it easier for you to review, I have tried to do it in section. ThirteenthGreg (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
It appears that it's now an advertisement for a martial arts website. Perhaps another re-write removing the website as the only source would be helpful--Ted Apr 20 2008
Discussion within the article
Regarding the major rewriting, user Bemiller, signing his changes "BOM," had made several modifications to the article that directly contradicted the existing text. Rather than changing the article, however, he had simply added his contradictory text below whatever he was contradicting. I have made an effort to merge the data he provided with the existing text. Please feel free to (a) correct the improper referencing style left over from BOM's comments, (b) correct any misinformation still present (don't forget to reference!).
Not Pressure Points?
What is the sensation I get when I scrape the bottom of my foot at the top of my arch and feel it in my toes, or scrape my side and feel strange in my leg, is this pressure points or something else?
That site seems to have nearly the exact same information, in those words. Who copied who? Someone mind running a check on edit dates? Me so lazy.07:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I've gone back briefly, and the words that appear in Wikipedia are made up of many different edits, so it couldn't have been copied from another article in one neat slice like that. For example, I added the words myself about the Golgi Tendons back in 2006: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pressure_point&diff=76158696&oldid=76135061
... and yet those words appear almost verbatim in the article. Does Wikipedia have a standard template for emailing people where this kind of breach has taken place?
Tagged: Multiple Issues
The article is riddled with grammatical errors; I would have proofread it but there seem to be some other issues that may warrant a (another?) complete rewrite.
Apart from the cleanup issues which are considerable, none of these sources are very reliable:
5 Points to a quote which describes Felix Mann's stance on the validity of pressure points as they relate to acupuncture. Not only is this an opinion for which there is no supporting evidence within the cited reference, but it's context is unrelated to this article.
6 Synthesizes information from it's source (stating that nociceptive reflex could give one an advantage in a fight).
11 Links to a forum.
7 and 9 Link to essays, and there are far more reliable sources on the subject available.
12 Points to a consensus statement developed by a panel at the National Institutes of Health. It would be an excellent source except for the disclaimer at the top of the page stating that the conclusions in the statement are dated and could in fact be wrong.
The rest are links to online bookstores, and given the unverifiability of the aforementioned sources and the fact that the book citations don't list page numbers makes them highly questionable.
If it weren't for the fact that this article has both cleanup issues and unverifiable sources it would be salvagable, but this article is going to need to be rewritten to be up to par. Erroramong (talk) 08:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Criticism section needed.
I note the opening says "...may produce significant pain or other effects ..." This implies scientific doubt about the matter. It later says "While it is undisputed that there are sensitive points on the human body where even comparatively weak pressure may induce significant pain or serious injury, the association of kyūsho with esotericist notions of qi, acupuncture or reflexology is controversial." Explain the controversy, please. ThuranX (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
there is no "scientific doubt" on the point that the human body has its more tender spots. This is so common sensical that most martial arts just go about the business of shielding the tender spots by using the more robust parts of the body without making a point of turning this into a science of "pressure-points".
The problematic part is, how to draw the line between "pressure-point" oriented martial arts and your general "hit him on the nose, then kick him in the nuts" type of martial arts. How aren't these "pressure points"? Because everyone already knows it hurts when you hit the nose or the testicles? --dab (𒁳) 09:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)