User talk:Cbowenwork

October 2023
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Bowen technique, you may be blocked from editing. A type of cabinet (talk) 17:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

You also have a conflict of interest and should be very careful. We do not write promotional articles. We document what reliable sources say and include criticisms, so don't whitewash those criticisms away. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 17:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello, I was under the impression with wikipedia as a informed and educated individual that I would be able to update the content. Sorry for the missunderstanding.
 * Alot of the info is not written well in this article. Some false info that has been proven and updated since this article had originally been published. There are alot of proven evidences that I had added into the article. I am a certified Bowen health therapist. I would like to direct you to Bowen College in vancouver BC canada. Please contact them to discuss updating the wikipeia article on the bowen technique and have supported scientific research thatvhas been proven with references.
 * Thanks. Cbowenwork (talk) 17:48, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not allow edits based on what people know. That is considered "original research". Deleting referenced content also not allowed unless new, valid references area added. Bowen College would not be considered an independent source of information. For medical/health topics there is a high standard for allowed references - basically review articles published in science journals. See WP:MEDRS. David notMD (talk) 18:38, 6 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The text you posted to the article was not written from a neutral point of view: it was clearly written by someone with a high regard for the subject, and a wish to convey that regard to the reader. Wikipedia is not a medium for people with a connection to a particular subject to promote its image to the public: that is for your own website to do, if you have one. You also removed existing content, some of it unfavourable to Bowen and his technique.
 * You removed references to sources, without any explanation, and added significant amounts of material without providing any references at all, which means we are asked to accept information on no basis other than that someone who has chosen to create a Wikipedia account says so. Wikipedia doesn't work like that, and if it did then Wikipedia would rapidly descend to the level of Twitter or Blogspot, where anyone at all can post virtually anything they like. JBW (talk) 18:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Normally any editor can make changes, but those with a COI must be very careful, and it's usually best they suggest their preferred version(s) on this talk page so other editors can weigh in before it actually gets put into the article. All changes should be backed by RS, mostly from independent sources, not "in-house" sources. Sourcing for medical claims is governed by our very strict WP:MEDRS guideline, which is stricter than the requirements for medical journals. That means that even good research studies won't do here. We require meta-analyses and reviews of multiple good studies. That is often lacking for things like Bowen. So propose what you think needs to be done and we can discuss it. Other editors may also pop in and participate. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 18:49, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Normally any editor can make changes, but those with a COI must be very careful, and it's usually best they suggest their preferred version(s) on this talk page so other editors can weigh in before it actually gets put into the article. All changes should be backed by RS, mostly from independent sources, not "in-house" sources. Sourcing for medical claims is governed by our very strict WP:MEDRS guideline, which is stricter than the requirements for medical journals. That means that even good research studies won't do here. We require meta-analyses and reviews of multiple good studies. That is often lacking for things like Bowen. So propose what you think needs to be done and we can discuss it. Other editors may also pop in and participate. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 18:49, 6 October 2023 (UTC)