Talk:Medical Scientism
Previous discussions are archived here:
Reasonable Compromise?[edit]
Original text has been slightly restructured in order to remove objectionable POV. I hope that this is a reasonable compromise? -- Mr-Natural-Health 20:38, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am about to revert Mr NH's latest addidions on the grounds that they are arumentative, not encyclopaedic. Bmills 15:13, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Dear Mr NH, Re-adding your POV comments is not "removing argumentative stance". Bmills 15:45, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I see no POV. But, as I have a life, I will improve the article, on another day. I have a newsletter to write!!!! -- Mr-Natural-Health 16:11, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Removed self-promotion[edit]
I removed the self-promoting link to Mr-Natural-Health's web site. Mr-Natural-Health, please feel free to point to non-self-promoting web sites which use this term. Jamesday 16:30, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Oops! That blunder should be acredited to me. BL 18:41, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)
Links are permitted in articles, period. So, kindly correct your error, or I will add back a perfectly valid link in a week or so. Cheers ... -- Mr-Natural-Health 16:46, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- And it'll be removed again as the blatant self-promotion it obviously is - David Gerard 17:16, Feb 11, 2004 (UTC)
- Self-promotion isn't. We don't exist so people can create articles about terms mainly used on their own web pages so that references will inevitably go to their own pages. There's interesting writing to be done about medical ethics, bought research and selection and presentation of only favorable studies but this isn't the article for it because "medical scientism" isn't the term used for bought science. It seems that we share a concern about those issues but that still doesn't mean that I think this article is the right place for it. Jamesday 20:12, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)