User talk:JzG/Archive 104

Archive 100

←

Archive 102

Archive 103

Archive 104

Archive 105

Archive 106

→

Archive 110

Query

• The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends Transcendental Meditation for lowering blood pressure. According to PMID 23608661, "TM may be considered in clinical practice to lower BP". Is the AHA part of the SCAM industry?

• The American Neurological Association (ANA) recommends cannabis for managing multiple sclerosis. According to PMID 24663230, "Clinicians might offer oral cannabis extract for spasticity symptoms and pain". Is the ANA engaging in quackery?

• The U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) recommends meditation for improving psychological stress. According to PMID 24395196, "Clinicians should be aware that meditation programs can result in small to moderate reductions of multiple negative dimensions of psychological stress." Is the AHRQ a lunatic charlatan?

• The American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) has included acupuncture as a treatment option for allergic rhinitis. According to PMID 25644617, "Clinicians may offer acupuncture, or refer to a clinician who can offer acupuncture, for patients with AR who are interested in nonpharmacologic therapy." Is the AAO-HNS an advocate of acupuncture?

More importantly, are the doctors following the guidelines of AHA, ANA, AHQR, and AAO-NHS believers in the SCAM industry and therefore enemies of the Declaraiton of Helsinki? -A1candidate 00:35, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

• Your determination to validate the invalid is truly impressive. Feel free to point out the studies that show TM to have an effect distinct from non-spiritual relaxation therapy. Meditation is a form of relaxation therapy and is not alternative, nor is it exclusive to "ancient wisdom" from any particular part of the world. The evidence on acupuncture shows that there are no such things as meridians, no such thing as qi, that it doesn't matter where you put the needles, and it doesn't seem to matter if you even put the needles in. And that is my last word on the matter until the evidence changes. We don't change the universe by changing Wikipedia, we do things the other way round, so when compelling evidence arises that changes the scientific consensus view on the nonsensical nature of the core claims of acupuncture, then we will follow that evidence. Guy (Help!) 14:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: That was not an invitation to continue your wall-of-text quackery apologia. Very obviously not, but of course you missed that, just as every SCAM apologist always misses anything that conflicts with their beliefs. And that's why it's alternative, as in, unproven or disproven. Guy (Help!) 18:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Hooray:-Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 11:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

The OP does not seem to realise that the opinions of groups of former medical students tend to run behind the science in areas like this. It will take time for the refutation of acupuncture to result in its removal from recommended practice, as it has done for homeopathy. Guy (Help!) 11:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I assume you know this already

You were mentioned (not by me ) on [| the AN ] page. It's the anonymous IP that keeps attempting to add in Fringe Sources in the Xenoglossary article. KoshVorlon Je Suis Charlie 20:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Who predicted that? Oh, everybody. Thanks. Guy (Help!) 23:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

FYI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --ArmyLine (talk) 06:00, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Load the gun again, your other foot is still in one piece. Guy (Help!) 23:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

JzG, You are claiming that I have added "FRINGE" material while it is added from the same article that other parts of the story was taken and it was listed in the references. I just added another part of it. I think you are doing a very poor job as an administrator. You block out people that they don't satisfy your personal taste. You are not an unbiased observer. I think you should let another administrator judges about this case.74.195.244.87 (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong, and everybody else right? Thought not. Guy (Help!) 18:43, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Xenoglossy page issue

JzG, You have semi-protected the 'Xenoglossy' page again. Please return it to usual. I am adding material from the same reference that it is listed in the article right now. I am adding different aspects of it. You are mistaken in your view point to support only selected part of Thomason reports. Please stop this biased approach. You can do a better job as an administrator.74.195.244.87 (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

By "usual" you mean your preferred version, rejected by everybody else. The answer is: No. Keep demanding this and you will end up banned. Guy (Help!) 18:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

response to talk on Ecat about implication of possible ban jumping

I noticed that you implied that I might be avoiding my topic ban on the Ecat talk page by using an IP. In addition the the arguments that TenOfAllTrades made in my defence, I'll point out that the ip in question (143.161.248.25) is different from my own IP which was revealed (by accident) on the ANI, (202.36.179.100), and that the IP in question is in Austria, while mine is in New Zealand. See [1] if you'd like to check for yourself. If you'd like to check my recent contributions, you'll see that I've been keeping myself busy with other articles. Insertcleverphrasehere (talk) 00:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, JzG. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dominic Frisby

Hello. I was hoping to create a page for Dominic Frisby, but Wikipedia won't let me, and I was wondering if you might be able to help. You deleted two creations of it in 2007 and 2008. I don't doubt that you were right to do so, as he wasn't sufficiently notable seven years ago, but he should be now:

• Life After the State, 2013
• Bitcoin: The Future of Money?, 2014
• Keiser Report, 2014
• IMdB

By the way, I have no connection with the subject. Edwardx (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• I suggest you write a draft (Draft:Dominic Frisby) and include reliable independent sources to substantiate the claim to notability, which none of the above actually are. The first two are sales pages (and should not be linked at all), they are also primary soruces for existence of books and so not evidence of notability. The second fails our sourcing guidelines and the last is a user-editable directory so is not independent and not evidence of importance. Guy (Help!) 14:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• I only have myself to blame (I would have made the same inference), but I wasn't planning to use those as sources. Anyway, I've created Draft:Dominic Frisby as you suggest. I've not added anything about the voiceover actor or comedian aspects, but I hope that the books are enough to establish notability. Edwardx (talk) 21:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The only source about Frisby is his publisher's blurb, which is not independent. Why do you think that a sales page for one of his books is a valid source? Guy (Help!) 09:31, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement warning

You are hereby warned for making this revert against consensus at G. Edward Griffin, based on your comment in the closure review at AN you were obviously aware of the close. This warning is issued under the WP:ARBPSEUDO decision and will be logged and may, in addition with your previous warning, may be taken into account and may lead to substantive sanctions. The appeals process for discretionary sanctions is here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

What? That makes no sense. I have clearly missed a comment somewhere, which is easily done in this case. Guy (Help!) 08:41, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

e/c This is a bullshit warning, as the terms of the arbcom decision were not broken-Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 08:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

This place is becoming fucking ridiculous. It is no longer possible to do the right thing for fear of offending the notions of POV-pushers about "process". Guy (Help!) 08:47, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

(I didn't mean Arbcom above, but RfC instead.) -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 14:09, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah. It's just we're putting new coversheets on all the TPS reports before they go out now. So if you could go ahead and try to remember to do that from now on, that'd be great. Jonathunder (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I would be interested to see the report that led to this: Atsme accuses me of passing 1RR and possibly 2RR. In fact, I made precisely one revert, which does not even violate 1RR. The first edit is not a revert, because the text is significantly different, and the one revert of its removal was in any case over a week later so would not have violated the 1RR restriction. No restrictions were violated. That is an absolute fact. Guy (Help!) 18:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The original report is here. What Callanecc wrote there in response to it, is the same as what he later wrote to you. The warning wasn't about the 1RR DS but rather about adding material you knew (or should have known) wouldn't find consensus. You'll do better if you argue with his actual justification for the warning... :) Jytdog (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thx for explaining that to him, Jytdog. His constant aspersions are problematic. Atsme☯^Consult 20:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

What "aspersions"? There is nothing wrong in wanting to see the report that yielded this bullshit warning. Your paranoid conspiracist nonsense, however, is defintiely problematic. Guy (Help!) 09:37, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

What Callanecc is doing at the moment is a well used admin trick called "Giving you lots of rope and waiting for you to hang yourself." That latest reference (on another page) to an edit of yours is part of the technique. I'm sure you've used it yourself. I've had it used on me. His defense of POV pushers and quacks using civility clauses of PAG is what the lunatic charlatans are working for. It is a well used, tried and trusted strategy. I'd use one of Atsme's nonsense phrases, "I consult you" to calm down, but grandmothers and eggs come to mind. -Roxy the dog™ (resonate) 10:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

• Sanction modified, see [2]. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:19, 22 February 2015 (UTC)