User:VorsprungDurchReden

Came to Wikipedia in July 2021 primarily after becoming interested in the John Mew article. Too ambitious for a Wikipedia article to cover whole topic but a Wikipedia article should at least be more accurate and balanced than the John Mew page is (or ever has been).

The main source is a long and amusing article from the New York Times Magazine. I hope that this isn't patronizing but for anyone reading the article: it has to be treated carefully, as the viewpoint shifts throughout the article, with the narrator sounding sometimes hostile to the Mews and highly persuaded by the critics, sometimes hostile to their critics and highly persuaded by the Mews. It is intended to be thought provoking instead of giving all the answers.

Sometimes quoting just one part would misrepresent the article.

I have read the article and offer to discuss its contents.

NYTM article is reliable but lacking detail in some key areas which there are good sources for and which I can work into the article. And the NYTM article is occasionally misquoted on the Wikipedia page, leading to some serious BLP issues currently.

It contains lots of information which hasn't been used in the Wiki page.

There are also important areas not covered by the NYTM article - which, after all, came about due to the rise of the 'Mewing' trend. Long before all this John Mew had achieved notability for his clashes with the dental profession and the alternative form of orthodontic treatment he has developed, practiced and promoted throughout his long working life. Before there was such a thing as Mewing, Incels or even YouTube John Mew was already notable enough, and not just among dentists, for a Wiki page.

Interesting as they are, I don't think a Wikipedia article can fully cover these debates.

I have no connection to dentistry, the Mews nor their advocates or critics etc., nor promoters of Mewing et

c.

Uptate: it is 31 dec 2021, what I wrote above was from a couple days ago.

I have made the changes I set out to make, I think I have explained them, I may have finished my involvement for now. I created sections on the talk page. I don't think there is much more I can do. I am not guardian of the page, if people undo my edits it is up to them, I gave my justifications and evidence for the important changes, I don't have more to say.

I may have a contribution to make on an existing talk page debate but that is minor.