Talk:Kevin Pauza

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kevin Pauza. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130531061236/http://feelingfit.com/jointandotherpain/topic/11742-8/story to http://feelingfit.com/jointandotherpain/topic/11742-8/story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150703075958/http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/healthquest/chronic-back-pain-spinal-fusion-may-be-wrong-surgery to http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/healthquest/chronic-back-pain-spinal-fusion-may-be-wrong-surgery
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151223102054/http://ryortho.iphost6.com/breaking/spinal-restoration-secures-funding-for-fda-process/ to http://ryortho.iphost6.com/breaking/spinal-restoration-secures-funding-for-fda-process/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:39, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Removing Inappropriate Over-Detail

I've noticed that the "Pauza Disc Treatment" section contains irrelevant information about Christopher J. Centeno, creator of the Regenexx Stem Cell Spinal Procedure. As this page is a Bio of Kevin Pauza, I don't think that there is any reason why anyone in the general public would be interested in reading about Christopher J. Centeno or the Regenexx Stem Cell Spinal Procedure while spending time on this page -- I think the appropriate thing to do is to remove it as over-detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Checkeredflag222 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Libelous Attacks and Questionable Sources

This page has an issue with contributors making inaccurate and unverifiable attacks against Kevin Pauza. The cited sources for these claims are questionable as they have an obvious conflict of interest - Christopher J. Centeno and the Regenexx Stem Cell Spinal Procedure are a competitor to Kevin Pauza and the Discseel treatment. Furthermore, these attacks are baseless in fact as many of the cited sources provide no sort of evidence to support their claims - they function as placeholder citations meant to get past Wikipedia bots. Since these attacks against Kevin Pauza cannot be verified with the sources provided, they should be removed as libel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Checkeredflag222 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Adding Content

I am declaring COI and will remain transparent and forthcoming while providing objective, verifiable, and reliable content throughout this process. Checkeredflag222 (talk) 01:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

Information to be removed: "On July 18, 2013, it was announced the results of its Phase III Investigational New Drug study had not met its success criteria, and injections of the Fibrin Sealant were not statistically significantly better than saline injections."

Explanation of issue: Contentious material about Kevin Pauza should be removed due to poor sourcing. The questionable source has an obvious conflict of interest - Christopher J. Centeno, the Regenexx Stem Cell Spinal Procedure, and its affiliates are competitors to Kevin Pauza and the Discseel treatment. The web pages cited as sources for this information are a Regenexx blog and a blog post by a Regenexx affiliate, Spinal Restoration, Inc.

References supporting change: "Spinal Restoration, Inc. Announces Disappointing Phase III Study Results for the Biostat® System". https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130718005215/en/Spinal-Restoration-Announces-Disappointing-Phase-III-Study www.businesswire.com. 2013-07-18. Retrieved 2019-04-15.

"New Disc Treatment: DISCSEEL™ to Heal? - Regenexx Blog". https://regenexx.com/blog/new-disc-treatment/ Regenexx. 2016-06-02. Retrieved 2019-10-05.

Information to be removed: "The procedure is being challenged by Christopher J. Centeno creator of the Regenexx Stem Cell Spinal Procedure. Centeno suggested that the research and data provided by Pauza is flawed and as of 2016, no real or medically relevant data has been provided to prove the cement biologic fibrin offered in the Discseel Procedure works or helps patients suffering from back and neck pain."

Explanation of issue: Libelous statements against Kevin Pauza cannot be verified with the sources provided, and should be removed. The cited sources have nothing to do with the libelous statements, except for the fact that they both make mention of the Discseel treatment. In addition, there seems to be a conflict of interest with the contributor for this information since Christopher J. Centeno, the Regenexx Stem Cell Spinal Procedure, and its affiliates are competitors to Kevin Pauza and the Discseel treatment. This information seems especially out of place here considering that this is a biography of Kevin Pauza, not Christopher Centeno.

References supporting change: "Early Fibrin Study vs New". https://discseel.com/patient-resources/for-physicians.html discseel.com. Retrieved 2019-10-05.

"Discseel™Procedure Takes Bold Steps to Increase Availability of Procedure". https://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/18/08/p12151470/discseel-procedure-takes-bold-steps-to-increase-availability-of-proced Benzinga. Retrieved 2019-10-05.

Checkeredflag222 (talk) 01:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Reply 20-DEC-2019

  Discussion required  

1. Disputatious issues ought not to be resolved through the COI edit request feature, a feature which is primarily meant for COI editors to propose nominally controversial edits to be reviewed by a neutral third party editor. Edit requests involving overtly controversial proposals such as the ones proposed here are not recommended for use with the {{request edit}} template.
2. The process of content dispute resolution needed here should begin with a discussion of the issues with local editors on the talk page. To that end, the COI editor is invited to continue the discussion below. That action may be followed by any of the subsequent dispute resolution strategies listed under WP:CONTENTDISPUTE.

Regards,  Spintendo  08:15, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

References

Reply 24-DEC-2019

Thanks  Spintendo , with that being said, I would like to bring the following issues up for discussion with local editors on this talk page:

1. The Biography page for Kevin Pauza contains libelous and false information that should be removed. I have outlined specifically what information I believe should be removed and why in the "Some Proposed Changes" section above. Despite my efforts to follow Wikipedias guidelines, my suggested edits were denied. Wikipedia's own policy on Biographies of living persons states that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be "removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." I am having trouble understanding why my edits keep getting denied and why this false & libelous information keeps on getting restored on the page.
2. I would like to improve the quality of this page by adding information about Kevin Pauza. I have declared myself as a COI editor and I wish to comply with all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. What is the best practice in my situation to add new information to the page without having it removed?

Best Regards, Checkeredflag222 (talk) 19:01, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

References

Requesting Discussion 27-DEC-2019

• Spintendo, it seems to me that the excessive red tape on this talk page is preventing serious issues from being resolved in a timely manner. As you indicated earlier, a discussion between local editors on this talk page is required to resolve the issues that are up for dispute - issues that are very serious in nature considering they involve false and libelous information about a living person. I have followed your instructions in asking for a discussion about these issues with local editors. Since then, some time has passed and not a single reply has been made from any other editors. How can we expect to go through the process of content dispute resolution if no one else is here to participate in the discussion? Checkeredflag222 (talk) 19:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Attention Required: Discussion Needed From Local Editors

• Spintendo & *Melcous, something needs to be done about the discussion on this talk page. As I pointed out in my earlier post dated 27-DEC-2019, if there is no discussion from other local editors regarding the issues that I have raised, the necessary changes will not be made. This is unacceptable, as there are serious issues on this page that violate Wikipedia's policies about biographies of living persons. I am following and complying with all of the Wikipedia policies that the moderators have asked me to follow, however, the process that has been laid out for me to make edits on this page is not working and is contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia's intent to be a reliable source of information. What is the best way to go forward with righting the issues that I proposed in my suggested edits dated 20 December 2019 (UTC)? Checkeredflag222 (talk) 17:55, 31 December 2019 (UTC)