Talk:Circadian advantage

[Untitled]
I have tried to clean this article up and make it as objective as possible. Wcwinter (talk) 16:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I see; and you have removed the coi maintenance tag too. Overall, I think this is not a bad article, but I do have reservations that you are Dr. W. Chris Winter, the author of much of this work, and thus conflict of interest issues may appear. I'm sure you have seen the message I put on your talk page; perhaps (when this page is more complete) you could request a peer review to ensure objectivity? I'm not sure how else this could be addressed. Rhebus (talk) 17:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I want to be as transparent as possible and would welcome a peer review. I will continue to try to strengthen the article and pull in outside references. With the attention this concept has received recently, I wanted to make sure that online information about circadian advantage was properly defined and referenced. I welcome any further input and have no problem with the site containing references to their being a potential conflict of interest or similar disclaimers.Wcwinter (talk) 17:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I asked down at the Village Pump about this issue; the response is at Village_pump_(assistance). While there are conflict of interest issues here, the response was that they are minor and the article as it stands looks fine. Rhebus (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The discussion has been archived, it is now at Village_pump_(assistance)/Archive_11 Rhebus (talk) 12:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)