Jump to content

User talk:Lmanndc

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, Lmanndc and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Ronz (talk) 17:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Case study as source on Ankylosing Spondylitis[edit]

Thanks for contacting me on my talk page. While I agreed with your removal of the poorly sourced material, your addition to the article gave undue weight to a primary case study in a way that seems a bit promotional. The crux if the issue is WP:MEDRS, especially WP:MEDSCI. Primary studies should never be used to draw medical conclusions. Case studies, especially case studies involving a single individual, are rarely worth mentioning in any context.

Assuming by your username that you might be a chiropractor, you might want to familiarize yourself with the Chiropractic article and the ongoing disputes there on how to best present chiropractic practice within Wikipedia. --Ronz (talk) 17:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Ronz First, my assumption is that Wikipedia is for the benefit of mankind; therefore many of the people looking at this article are affected by AS and are looking for help/knowledge. It is virtually impossible to perform a double blinded study on any of the physical healing arts; and all of Chiropractic's research budget worldwide isn't even a drop in the bucket of even a single drug research. Is Chiropractic being held to a higher standard? By your criteria, I will be removing the following from the AS article as none of it has any resources.

Ronz First, my assumption is that Wikipedia is for the benefit of mankind; therefore many of the people looking at this article are affected by AS and are looking for help/knowledge. It is virtually impossible to perform a double blinded study on any of the physical healing arts; and all of Chiropractic's research budget worldwide isn't even a drop in the bucket of even a single drug research. Is Chiropractic being held to a higher standard? By your criteria, I will be removing the following from the AS article as none of it has any resources.

Physical therapy[edit]

Some of the therapies that have been shown to benefit AS patients include:

Moderate-to-high impact exercises like jogging are generally not recommended or recommended with restrictions due to the jarring of affected vertebrae that can worsen pain and stiffness in some patients.

-

In all due respect and seriousness though, does removing this make this Wikipedia page better for the person seeking help???

Lmanndc (talk) 04:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks Larry[reply]

Ronz I'm not sure I'm entering correctly on this talk page; please let me know if not. The following is from Wikipedia: "Ideal sources for biomedical material include general or systematic reviews in reliable, third-party, published sources, such as reputable medical journals, widely recognised standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or medical guidelines and position statements from nationally or internationally recognised expert bodies."

What part of the above did my references not meet? Larry Lmanndc (talk) 04:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]