Lightvd

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Lightvd! Thank you for your contributions. I am TowTrucker and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! TowTrucker (talk) 19:09, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Death panels

Regarding this edit and other recent edits related to death panels, I was beaten to the punch by other editors to revert your changes, but I thought I should point out that your changes violate WP policy as they aren't supported by reliable sources. The Calabrese source you cite is an opinion piece. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Anyway, since it has been in the news, could you perhaps find a reliable source? Lightvd (talk) 20:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I already looked and couldn't find one. There was something from Hannity and a newspaper editorial. Both opinion sources. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Look at this if it helps; whether or not it is true, Howard Dean's comment should perhaps be added, considering so many other people's comments are on the "Death Panel" page: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=death+panels&oq=death+panels&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j43i53.1185.2949.0.3111.12.2.0.10.10.1.235.353.0j1j1.2.0...0.0...1ac.1.2IlT_oXKKgU#authuser=0&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=e43a663055b046e7&gl=us&hl=en&psj=1&q=death+panels+howard+dean&tbm=nws --Lightvd (talk) 20:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

What comment by Dean would you want added? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

One claiming Palin was right. My point is, it seems like the main purpose of the "Death Panel" article is calling Palin a liar, and the article has not been updated for what seems like years. --Lightvd (talk) 21:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Show me where Dean claimed Palin was right. Post a link. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:24, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Here is a paper. It is the sixth paragraph. Dean speaks about the Independent Payment Advisory Board, which performs the functions of a death panel.

Yes, Palin was referring to Obamacare. The transplant listing rule cited in the article, however, is a longstanding rule that pre-dates Obama's presidency and has nothing whatsoever to do with Obamacare or whose medical care is or is not paid for. If enough transplantable organs were available, the transplant rules would be moot: everyone would get the lungs/hearts/kidneys/etc. they need. The rules state what order the recipients get organs, not whether or not they get them.
Reliable sources state that Palin's claim is either an outright lie or an unforgivably naive misunderstanding of very clear legislation.
Please do not add this off-topic subject without discussing it on the article's talk page and establishing a consensus for its inclusion. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

But the girl could not get the transplant because she was deemed "too young," and that is not a "longstanding rule." You are referring to the rule that people get organs in the order they got their name on the list, but the problem was not that she was trying to skip other people, it was that she was "too young" to even be considered. (I took a look at the talk page for death panel and saw that many people are also pointing out how exaggerated it is; some dated back almost a year ago.)

Lightvd, who says that the IPAB performs the functions of a death panel? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Dr.F, the sixth paragraph says, "...the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor..." Palin said her comment about death panels was figurative. Therefore, since the whole death panel article is about something not clearly defined, there should be a broad approach. Dean claims that the IPAB can stop certain treatments. Even if his viewpoint is not reliable, it should fit in the "Supporters" section, or at least the "Politicians" section. There are tons of other politician quotes, whether or not they are supportive or in opposition. So this, since it is a recent claim, should be used to update the article, rather than only using comments from when Palin first made her claim. --Lightvd 23:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't support what you're calling a broad approach. WP:SYNTH says you're not allowed to connect the dots like that. Just because Howard Dean opposes the IPAB doesn't mean he was saying it's a death panel. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:00, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

In the Palin's Response section on the Death Panel article, it says, "She explained that the term should not be taken literally..." This means we should get rid of the article because "not literally" can mean anything (aka, a broad approach, which you say is not allowed). No one has the right to say she meant it "literally," because she said, "figuratively." If we do not get rid of the article, then it should be clear that she described "death panels" as "not literally." Therefore, we must take a broad approach; "death panel" is not sentencing someone to death, that is obvious. It is denying people their medical needs. There may not be a panel, so we can assume that "panel" means "legislation." Death panel=legislation deeming someone unfit for medical care.

In paragraph six of the paper Dean wrote, it says, "The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body." We must assume death panels are health-care rationing bodies because we need to look at it figuratively.

So, Dean might not be saying "death panel," but he is saying that, because of the PPACA, "...the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor..." That is a "figurative death panel," and that is what the article is about, so it should be in there.

There are two choices: the broad approach, or simply making the article small and removing unnecessary information. (The broad approach isn't violating Wikipedia's rules because the article is a "figurative death panel," which is very broad.

Basically, the article is filled with criticisms and quotes, but they are all talking about literal death panels, not figurative ones; this means none should be there. They are saying death panels are a myth, but Palin meant something like, "legislation deeming someone unfit for medical care."

I just checked all the resources for the paper and none of them come from 2012 or 2013; a lot of things can happen in two years, especially in politics. Howard Dean seems pretty credible, considering he was thinking about running for President in 2016 and he did run and win other seats. All of the "credible resources" currently being used for the death panel article were mostly all written by random newspaper journalists. Lightvd 03:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

If you still disagree and think I am "connecting dots," you cannot disagree that Palin meant figurative death panels, so all of the insinuating quotes about Palin lying are false because they all refer to literal ones. Lightvd (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Those are interesting theories that you're welcome to discuss at Talk:Death panel or Talk:IPAB. However my point is much narrower: Dean didn't say the IPAB is a death panel, either literally or figuratively, and he didn't say he agrees with Palin, either literally or figuratively. Nor have any reliable sources. Therefore we're not allowed to say it either. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 08:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)