Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2013 July 1

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

Edit request on 5 July 2013[edit]


Before I set out the changes to the text required, let me say that locking out direct edits is a good idea in this case, as every time I re-post my response to this question, some unidentified idiot deletes it, generally leaving no explanation. (The last couple of times, text was added "statement by banned user..." but that makes no sense to me. For waht reason was I banned? How? When? By who?) I discovered Reference Desk a few weeks ago and have provided answers to several questions without problem. But for some reason some vandal took a dislike to my answers on this question (Does malaria occur in Japan? One can only assume that the enquirer wants to know because he/she palns to go to Japan, or he/she has friends there). My answer is obviously correct, as it is based on info provided by the Japanese Govt, the American CDC, and relavent referenced data provided in the Wikipedia article on Malaria. All of which are reliable sources.

Initially, the unknown vandal only deleted mmy second post on this question, so I though perhaps we are only suppsed to have one say. But the guidelines don't say that, and after a while all 3 posts were fully deleted each time.

Edit Request 1: Someone has added control script that hides my first post, begining "No. Malaria does not occur ...." Could you please delete this control script so that my answer is visible.

Edit Request 2: After the post provided by Findlay Walters, please insert the following:- :::Actually, it is Aspro that has it garbled. The climate of Britain and Japan is similar, and neither have malaria, except in a (very) few cases where people have returned/arrived from tropical/sub-tropical areas. The citation linked in the first answer is of the Japanese Government Infectious Disease Surveillance Centre and supports what the first answer said. Quote: "...medical experts who have clinically experienced malaria are few in Japan...", and it goes on to explain that this is a problem for those few people who return to Japan after catching malaria in other countries. In other words they don't catch it in Japan. Suitable mosquitoes may occur in Japan and elsewhere, but without a hot tropical climate (and jungle terrain) there just aren't enough of them to matter. The same applies to Britain. Malaria is occasionally diagnosed in Britain, in people who have returned from malaria prone areas. The ref cited by Findlay supports this as far as recent times goes. Malaria-like diseases hundreds or more years ago occurred but aren't proven to be malaria. The average Brit, and the average Japanese, just doesn't have any risk of malaria. If you look at the map of incidence in the Wikipedia article on malaria (or just read the last sentence in the first paragraph), you'll see immediately that malaria occurs in a band corresponding to the tropics/sub-tropics. Japan (and Britain) are simply just way too far north. One of the reasons why Japan lost the war in the pacific ( is that their soldiers suffered terribly from malaria as military planners in Japan had no awareness of it. However, the Brits and Australians were experienced in administering territories in the tropics and knew what precautions (keep covered) to enforce, and how to treat it. Japanese soldiers returned to Japan at the end of the War in huge numbers, infected with malaria. But it just did not spread to the resident population, proving that Aspro's comment that a vector exists there, but no pool of infection (as there was a pool just after WW2) is wrong. It isn't logical anyway. In any disease, if there is a means of spreading, infection will build up.

Edit Request 3: After the response posted beginning "Yep, the climate is suitable...." (The climate of Japan is not suitable, as a glance at any map of the distribution of malaria in the world will show) Please insert the following:- :::There are some similarities in climate between North Carolina and some parts of Japan. However the Wikipedia articles on each show that North Carolina is far warmer in summer, about 32 C versus around 25 C for Japan. And there's not much swamp lands comparitively in Japan. Yep, it just shows why in Japan, there were peaks of malaria in returning soldiers (from World War 2 and earlier actions), but continuing infection does not and cannot occur. You can check the government travel vaccination & infection precaution advisories issued by the country of your choice, eg the US CDC Check it - if you select tropical countries like the Phillipines, it tells you to check medical advice on protecting against malaria. If you select Japan, it doesn't mention malaria - because you won't get malaria there. (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, but your posts were removed by several editors (including me) because your problematic original research and editing is consistent with that of the roaming IP editor WickWack who is topic banned. from making contributions. Answers also need to be sourced properly, but your long argumentative posts regarding the reason Japan has no malaria is original research that is contrary to the facts given in the very sources you provided, thus your answers are not proper for the desk (they do not meet our guidelines). -Modocc (talk) 02:35, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Well, that doesn't seem fair, nor does it seem reasonable, nor is it logical. I make the following points:-
  • If I understand you correctly, your reasons for deletion are as follows:-
1. There is a roaming IP editor known as "Wickwack" who is banned.
2. I have made posts like Wickwack did, so therefore I should be banned as well
3. My posts were wrong in fact and thus should be deleted anyway.
  • Regarding 1 and 2, what is it that I did that is like what Wickwack did? What is is it about my posts that warants a ban? I am not Wickwack. If Wickwack is banned, that's his problem. It should not be mine.
  • Regarding 3, is it normal practice on Reference Desk for others not involved in the topic to anonymously remove posts they think are wrong? That does not seem sensible, and I can't belive that how Reference Desk operates. On what basis are you yourself qualified to decide its wrong? Further, if posts can or should be removed by anybody who thinks they are wrong, then given its human nature to disagree on just about anything, there should be nothing left. Posts disgreeing with each other should not be a problem. The person who posted the question can read the various answers, check the references given, and decide for himself.
Regarding 3 further, my post is NOT wrong. It is supported by the references I cited, including, including a direct quote. These are the facts:-
  • Fact 1: There is NO malaria in Japan, apart from a very few persons who were infected when not in Japan. You can verify this easily by checking the US CDC, the Wikipedia article on Malaria, or checking the Japanese Government Disease Surveilence website. My posts gave the links for all three.
  • Fact 2: Malaria cannot spread in Japan. The evidence of that is that after WW2 and other actions Japan has been involved in, very large numbers of Japanese soldiers and other personell returned home after been infected in malaria-prone countries. Their disease just did not spread to the rest of the population. This is an easily verifiable fact from a number of sources, including the Japanese Govt website I cited. See it above.
  • Fact 3: Japan is located well outside the World's malaria belt, which is located in the tropics. You can see this yourself be looking at the world distribution map in the Wikipedia article on Malaria. Please check it.
All three facts were covered in my posts.
Please reconsider your actions. You said other editors as well as yourself removed my posts. Do you represent them?
I had a quick look at the Administrator's Noticeboard link you provided. There is a very considerable volume of words by various people there under many topic headings. Most, if not all, seems to have no relavence whatsover to me or my posts.
Could an Administrator person have a look at this, please.

Whether or not you are WickWack, this is still an edit request and your requested additions are problematic. For instance, you state "...proving that Aspro's comment that a vector exists there... wrong". Of course, Aspro and others never said a vector exists there. In addition, your statement that "mosquitoes may occur in Japan and elsewhere, but without a hot tropical climate (and jungle terrain) there just aren't enough of them to matter." is not sourced and your last point that Japan is not near areas were malaria exists is false too since it occurs in China across the same latitudes [1]. Pages are often protected this way against IP vandalism, thus if you do not want to have future problems with being mixed up with a banned IP troll you can register an account to make edits without having to make these requests. --Modocc (talk) 06:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Ok, so essentially you are saying you deleted it because it is in factual error. That's not right.
How can you possibly say that Aspro did not say a vector exists in Jpan when that is the whole thrust of his post? See his last sentence: "The climate of Japan suits the vector (mosquitoes) very nicely." In fact Aspro introduced the term "vector", before I did.
It is unfortunate you found and mis-interpreted a simplified CDC map that shows incidence bounded by country/political borders - which is a common approach in maps. It is not wrong in CDC intent, because the intent is to answer the question "If I go to country xyz, do I have to worry about disease abc?". For instance it shows malaria as occuring thoughout West Papua but not Papua New Guinea, with a dead straight line demarkation aligned with the political border. That's rediculous. Only a gradual transition would be possible - unless you think mosquitoes can read maps and are careful to not fly across borders. The border is an arbitary line drawn across extremely difficult to access mountain jungle - which you can verify quickly with Google Earth. You are misreading the CDC map by assuming malaria occurs as far north in China to align with Japan. Refer to the wikipedia map at, which clearly shows malaria does not occur in Japan, and also shows it does not occur in China at the same latitudes. So my last point, supported by the link I gave, is certainly correct.
And even if you were right, and I wrong, how does that give you the right to delete another's posts? You could have posted your view in Reference Desk so the enquirer gets the benefit. I would not object to that, not would I ever delete it, though I might consider refuting it. Probably not in this case though, as the enquirer or a third party can easily compare the two maps and work out which to trust quite easily. With both my posts, and the post you could have made, plus the others, everything would have been said that needed to be said, in order to satisfy the enquirer.
Can an admin person have a look at this please?
Thanks, RJB
You can check that the CDC map is not inaccurate because it provides an interactive application that gives the provinces affected and you can check their latitudes on a map: "Rural parts of Anhui, Guizhou, Hainan, Henan, Hubei, and Yunnan provinces. Rare cases occur in other rural parts of the country below 1,500 m (4,921 ft) between May-December. None in urban areas. Some major river cruises may go through malaria endemic areas in Anhui and Hubei provinces." Again, posts need to meet the guidelines and yours did not nor do they, and were therefore disruptive, whether intentional or not[2][3]. I'm not sure why I'm having to point this out, but Aspro said that "There is no indigenous malaria in Japan anymore..." [emphasis in bold is mine] -Modocc (talk) 07:55, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I think the straightforward solution to your major frustration - summary deletion of your posts - will be solved by creating a user account (which is free and fast). Until you do that, you are likely to be swept up in the topic ban that has been applied because of "WickWack"'s problematic editing behavior. There are some real benefits to having an account, described here: WP:ACCOUNT. -- Scray (talk) 12:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Scray here. While generally speaking, editors are fully welcome to edit without creating accounts, in this case abuse of wikipedia by someone using the same ISP and editing from a similar location make it difficult and it's quite likely your edits are going to be identified as coming from the same banned editor, therefore your best bet is to create an account and stick to it. BTW, can you give ther examples of replies you have left? Also take a read of WP:Vandalism, the removals were not vandalism. Incidentally, if you really are WickWack, I suggest your drop this and leave the RD as per the topic ban you are surely aware of. You might have a chance of being allowed back after several months or years if you do that and make a future appeal and are able to sufficiently assure people you will behave properly. Nil Einne (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)