Talk:Paolo Zamboni

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WP:BLP concerns

Editor User:Galassi is assigning theoretical ideas (ie: chelation therapy - in the current version now simply called vein "cleanup") to Dr. Zamboni for which no references have so far shown to exist. This sort of editing has the potential to tarnish the scientific reputation of this doctor. As a result of this concern I am reverting more than 3 times to preserve this doctor's reputation. Sincerely, 87.231.131.227 (talk) 19:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above editor has since edited the article and moved away from the original research of "chelation therapy" he/she introduced however there is still a concern in that the word "noticed" is used relative to iron and "heavy metals" in the brain. There are no references saying Dr. Zamboni "noticed" anything and there are no references talking about "heavy metals" (plural) being a problem. One reference describes iron as a "heavy metal" (singular) described as a potential cause in prior medical literature. The terminology Heavy metal (chemistry) is not scientific particularly with respect to iron which has never been described scientifically as a "heavy metal". 87.231.131.227 (talk) 19:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Everything is sourced, there is no WP:OR. Zamboni mentioned heavy metals in a lecture he gave a few days ago. That would be sourced eventually.-Galassi (talk) 20:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Articles don't rely upon "eventual sources" to support content (crystal ball anyone?) and there is no source for Dr. Zamboni "noticing" anything. On these two issues alone your editing is problematic here. 87.231.131.227 (talk) 20:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Paolo Zamboni. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:32, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Research Released

New research on this topic has been released; please consider updating this article. http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/multiple-sclerosis-liberation-therapy-clinical-trial-1.4014494 Thanks, Sturgeontransformer (talk) 05:33, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

This article makes it look like it is generally accepted that multiple sclerosis is caused by chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency. It is in fact generally accepted among experts in this field that it is not. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem is not the neutrality of the article, but the lack of the encyclopedics criteria. Is it possible to ask the community if it's the case to delete the article?--LuigiPetrella (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I significantly toned down the CCSVI section, as I agree it made it sound significantly less controversial than it actually is. I kept the CVI, cerebral venous drainage, and diagnosis on painting sections for the time being as all of this is outside my field, but I'm not sure we need to keep them? It doesn't seem that notable, and looks like someone used Wikipedia to write/spice up their own CV; having entire sections on that seems way out of proportion. This is why I kept the "neutrality" template for now. Arp242 (talk) 14:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Paolo_Zamboni"