Chemicus 234
Welcome!
edit
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.
If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Shilajit
editGreat job on improving the Shilajit article. It is much better now and the references you added are great. SilverserenC 08:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Psoriasis and the Chaga mushroom
editHi, Chemicus 234. I've reverted your addition to the Psoriasis article and its link to an unreviewed primary source on Chaga as a psoriasis treatment, per WP:Primary and WP:MEDRS. So far, I've found no unequivocal support in secondary and tertiary sources for Chaga's "near 100%" efficacy as treatment for psoriasis, nor for a clear mechanism of action. The conclusions in the study you linked therefore seem somewhat speculative; but I'd be happy to be proven wrong on both counts. Scientifically sound sources are usually available at google-scholar; the results of my own search are here. Regards, Haploidavey (talk) 13:25, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, Haploidavey. One question only: did you actually read the article ? It is a case study and its outcome is described. It is an old Sovjet source (1973) and it might even have been discussed in other Sovjet journals; there's no way to check that, it is outside of the digital domain. I strongly believe my addition should have a place in the psoriasis article; it is a successful case study and presented as such. How can you question something that happened before your eyes ?
Regards, Chemicus 234 (talk) 13:42, 4 September 2011 (UTC)Chemicus 234 (talk)
- Indeed, I read it thoroughly, and I don't doubt your good faith in supplying it. However, the inclusion of material at Wikipedia rests entirely and stringently on WP:RS, not on personal impressions, judgments or preferences for this or that theory, primary source, study or technique, no matter how convincing they might seem. This is a matter of policy. You're very welcome to bring the matter up at the article talk-page for discussion, clarification and consensus on the best way forward here, but please, do read WP:MEDRS carefully beforehand. It gives essential guidance on this and other matters related to sourcing at medical articles. Best Regards, Haploidavey (talk) 14:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)