User talk:BallenaBlanca/2015

Restoring deleted content to other user's talk pages
Per WP:OWNTALK, editors are free to remove almost anything except "declined unblock requests and speedy deletion tags" from their own talk pages - you shouldn't restore such material. If anything the blanking is a useful sign that they've read it. --McGeddon (talk) 09:17, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Celiac disease and epilepsy
An interesting discussion. The 2008 ref says "Bottom line There are the same methodological issues in the epilepsy literature as there were in the ataxia and neuropathy literature already discussed. From the evidence-based perspective, there is conflicting evidence whether there is or is not an association between coeliac disease or auto-antibodies and epilepsy. As yet there is no compelling evidence that there is a causal relation. There probably is a specific syndrome—coeliac disease with epilepsy and calcifications—which is rare and perhaps geographically specific."

So adjusted our text. By the way welcome to Wikipedia it is great having you join us :-) User:Samir is another gastroentrologist. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 09:16, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

November 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Gluten-free diet. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Alexbrn (talk) 08:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * ✅ See: --BallenaBlanca (talk) 09:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 14 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Gluten-free diet page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=690635073 your edit] caused an unsupported parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F690635073%7CGluten-free diet%5D%5D Ask for help])
 * I'm working on this page. I still have work to do in it and I am checking errors. Fixed. Best regards. --BallenaBlanca (talk) 07:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Gluten editing
You seem to be on a mission to relate gluten-sensitivity or non-celiac gluten sensitivity to the articles on wheat, pasta and gluten. I have reverted or edited the additions following WP:OFFTOPIC, WP:NOTADVICE and WP:OR. The Italian group publications you cite are opinion articles which you then are summarizing with your own interpretations and advice, leading to original research and provision of advice. This is clearly inappropriate for wheat and pasta, and is not central to the gluten article, as enough is already stated for CD and NCGS; please see WP:NOTEVERYTHING. --Zefr (talk) 02:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hellow, . I do not see where the problem is. It's enough to take a look at the definition of the disease. There is a lot of sources, growing literature, about non-celiac gluten sensitivity. One example (this is not a free-access paper, but I have it):
 * We can't talk about gluten, wheat, barley,ride, and all of its hybrids and derivatives, and its health effects without mentioning non-celiac gluten sensitivity. This syndrome was originally described in the 1980s and included since 2010 in the spectrum of gluten-related disorders.
 * We can't talk about gluten, wheat, barley,ride, and all of its hybrids and derivatives, and its health effects without mentioning non-celiac gluten sensitivity. This syndrome was originally described in the 1980s and included since 2010 in the spectrum of gluten-related disorders.


 * It seems that you are systematically deleting all information about non-celiac gluten sensitivity. This practice seems an attempt to bias the information and does not fit neutral point of view.


 * Best regards. --BallenaBlanca (talk) 03:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * On the contrary, my reverts began with WP:NPOV, especially for the pasta article which mentions gluten (with wikilink) as a component of some pastas, so is adequately stated for the general user. Discussion of NCGS is WP:OFFTOPIC and leads to an advisory for a small percentage of users, per WP:NOTADVICE. --Zefr (talk) 04:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Gluten is the component of most pastas, not "some" pastas. Coeliac people represent 1-2% of the general population and non-celiac gluten sensitivity sufferers up to 13%. Information about special pastas for coeliacs were already present, before my first editions:

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Northamerica1000 (talk | contribs) at 13:41, 7 December 2015

But, I repeat, we can't talk about coeliac disease or gluten-related disorders without mention non-celiac gluten sensitivity. I have not made any recommendation, only neutral information which updates the outdated (and dangerous) previous. To do otherwise or delete this is biased information and does not fit neutral point of view.:

Revision as of 11:57, 11 December 2015 BallenaBlanca (→‎Ingredients: Not only coeliac sufferers. Expanding. Sources: (Jun 2015) PMID 26060112; (2013) PMID 23797124; (Mar 1, 2006) PMID 16480395)

Bold, my new text. Where is a recommendation or not neutral point of view in this edition, that you reverted in (→‎Ingredients: rv off-topic or unsourced vague content & ref) a posterior review? Off-topic? Unsourced? Vague...?

And I have no words to express this "In modern times to meet the demands of coeliac sufferers and similar diets, the use of rice, maize and whole durum wheat has become commercially significant.". that were present before my editions and I corrected at this one (→‎Ingredients: Durum wheat for coeliac patients or other gluten-related disorders sufferers!? It contains gluten!) It is clear the lack of information that had who wrote it!

Best regards. --BallenaBlanca (talk) 13:07, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Celiac vs. coeliac, fyi. When in doubt about American etymology, use the spelling with the fewest characters. --Zefr (talk) 16:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Doc James (talk · contribs · email) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Thanks for all you have done this year :-) Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

NCGS and WP:NOTJOURNAL
BallenaBlanca: your editing on Gluten still impresses as "over the top" of the general intent for a lay encyclopedia, violating WP:NOTJOURNAL by extensively detailed content and over-sourcing. Please review WP:CITEKILL, especially this section, where your content is more like a scholarly review article for your field of medicine, rather than providing general content for the typical Wikipedia user. Thanks for your attention and improvements on behalf of the lay users. --Zefr (talk) 18:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank you very much for your kindness and your explanations. I've been reading this with attention and I agree with you. Really, I did not like the result of the listing of NCGS symptoms, but I thought it was better like this to facilitate review.
 * I will edit following your advices and simplifying, and completing the NGCs manifestations, which in this version are very scarce and not enough representative, to clarify for our lay readers.
 * Best regards. --BallenaBlanca (talk) 23:58, 28 December 2015 (UTC)