User talk:Dematt

Invitation to CfD Category:Pseudoskeptic Target Discussion
I noticed that you have edited in related areas within WP, and so thought you might have an interest in this discussion.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 18:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Treatment techniques
The Talk:Chiropractic section needs an expert on the subject. I hope you are interested in helping out in reaching WP:GA status for chiropractic. This is possible with the help of an expert. QuackGuru (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Request
Hiya, at the pseudosciences list, I realize that it's a hot topic, but unless there's a strong consensus to do so on the talkpage, it's probably not a good idea to be removing sourced information like this. You may wish to modify the information, but the citations themselves should probably be left in place. Thanks, --Elonka 04:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Elonka, good to see you're still here. I respect what you are trying to do.  Sorry to get involved, I'll leave it up to you. -- Dēmatt  (chat)  04:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, was on vacation for awhile (Caribbean cruise, it was great!), and just got back last night. I'm still wading through my watchlist, and trying to sort out where I can best help.  Do feel free to keep engaging at the pseudoscience list, I'm not trying to scare you off.  :)  All I'm asking is that you leave the citations in place, and perhaps try to modify the information from those citations. For example, perhaps create a new subsection on that page for certain entries, or rewrite them a bit?  I'm not sure, I'm just trying to help avoid the "A reverts B, C reverts A, D reverts C, etc." edit wars.  ;)  Thanks for understanding, --Elonka 04:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * And you are doing a wonderful job as usual. I am sure that you will eventually get a good grip on it, but I'm afraid I don't have the kind of time it takes to deal with QuackGuru's loving little soul.  If the bar for the inclusion criteria ever sinks so low as to include chiropractic, a profession that sees 10% of the US population in any one year, then it is too vague to clear the NPOV criteria for lists.  If you raise that bar then it fails WP:PSCI, no matter what any quasi-reliable source says.  Just doing my part.


 * Did you do the Eastern cruise or the Western cruise? I've done both and loved each of them.  I wanna go baaaackk!!!  Though I was concerned about your situation last year, glad to see you fought through it.


 * Thanks for your kindness. -- Dēmatt (chat)  04:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice to see two people whom I highly respect. Elonka, that might surprise you, chiroskeptic that I am, but Dematt is a man of integrity. Even when we disagree, and we do at times, we do it agreeably ;-) He has been the major factor in the expansion of the chiropractic article from a pitiful state to what it is today. A great Wikipedian!


 * I am uneasy about the current dispute, since I'm somewhat split over the issue. The heading states that we can include the opinions of skeptics, but they are being kept out. The inclusion criteria are right in the heading, but PSCI is being applied. The problem is, we aren't placing it in the Category, just documenting that skeptics consider it to be pseudoscientific.


 * OTOH, I also have qualms about including "chiropractic" as a whole, since it's a mixed bag. The parts of chiropractic that are generally considered pseudoscientific are three things:


 * Vertebral subluxation (VS) and
 * Innate Intelligence, with its Vitalism.


 * VS is still the philosophical (no VS, no excuse for the existence of the profession) and legal foundation of the profession (no treatment of subluxation, no payment from Medicare!), and that is problematic for chiropractic and its reputation in the scientific and skeptical community, since it's a pseudoscientific construct without anatomical basis. Only chiropractors (mostly straights) believe in it. Many are openly against it, but it would be suicidal of the profession to openly reject it.


 * Ideally we should include those three concepts, and state that the first two are elements of chiropractic, and include vitalism by itself, since it is an element of many forms of alternative medicine, not just chiropractic.


 * I'm tired of the wikilawyering that panders to the fringe, instead of fighting for an NPOV version that will allow inclusion. Changing the article's title will solve that problem. People can choose one side or the other. Either they will exploit the current title to support keeping fringe ideas out, or they will support an NPOV title to allow inclusion. BTW, these elements of chiropractic that should be mentioned aren't "Questionable science", but clearly PS. They are in the first two of the four WP:PSCI criteria.


 * One things is certain, no matter what we do, and no matter how well sourced, and even if DD Palmer himself appeared and admitted he had been one of the greatest quacks of all time, Levine2112 will appear and make sure that the word chiropractic is not allowed to stay on the page, even if he has to use socks and meatpuppets. There will never be peace there if the word is mentioned. The edit history has shown that to be the case. Only tight admin control and sanctions can prevent that. -- Fyslee (talk) 05:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Fyslee, thanks for the kudos. I know you are doing your best to be as neutral as you can and I do appreciate that, but you have to remember that pseudoscience is a pejorative and is a serious accusation.  You can't create a list with 'the skeptical inquirer' as inclusion criteria as one of the accusers and expect it to ever be NPOV.  That is why we require things like  this type of inclusion criteria.  So if you really want to work toward NPOV and credibility for wikipedia, work to correct the inclusion criteria and the rest will take care of itself.


 * By the way, vitalism is not pseudoscience. All healers were vitalists until the early 20th century.  Now when vitalists inject a spiritual being into the picture, it becomes religious, but that is not pseudoscience by definition.  The new vitalists have migrated to emergence - and that is all materalistic  and uses organization as an explanation for the development of intelligence when reductionist concepts can no longer answer the questions of life.  One of our very own past wikipedians User:Gleng is one of those, and actually has finished research on the first model of how an emergent system might work showing how oxytocin will not result in lactation without suckling because the hypothalimus must receive the nerve stimulation from the alveoli before it will be primed to release the oxytocin.  There is no way to have understood these processes in the days of DD Palmer, so yes they gave them spiritual elements.  All people believed that. Innate intelligence has little scientific meaning today and I don't know any chiropractors that use the term (not saying there aren'a ny out ther), but can be thought of as a metaphor for those body functions that are controlled by the brain, which are most all as far as anyone knows.  The degree that chiropractic has any affect on those functions is being studied.  Is it going to show that 'chiropractic cures all ills' - No.  And no-one says so.  If you find any chiropractic organization that says so, let me know.  Now are there chiropractors that think they can cure all ills - YES, and they drive us all crazy, but that does not mean that they are pseudoscientists, only crazy.


 * Thanks for lending me your ear. -- Dēmatt (chat)  06:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Dematt!!
Welcome back!!!! ... and thanks for the barnstar! ☺ Coppertwig(talk) 01:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Welcome back to The Other Place (tm) :-). BTW, can you get the necessary people over at the Other-Other Place to edit their Vit C article to make it more readible.  It's long winded gibberish at the moment, almost like it's been run through Bablefish or something :-(.   Ta Shot info (talk) 11:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom request for clarification: WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE
A request has been made for clarification of the ArbCom case WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE as it relates to List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts. I'm leaving this notification with all editors who have recently edited the article or participated in discussion. For now, the pending request, where you are free to comment, may be found here. regards, Backin72 (n.b.) 13:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Chirocad 300dpi.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chirocad 300dpi.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 22:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Ddpalmer3.jpg
File:Ddpalmer3.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:DDPalmer.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Chiropractic.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Chiropractic.JPG I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 01:45, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

FICS
Thanks for fixing my reference :) I'm hoping to move the article over to mainspace soon, but the admin that deleted it last month says he still thinks it fails WP:Note, so I'm going to try to dig up a few more references if possible. Good to see you are back - I myself have taken several months off, and am not sure how much I'll be on here. DigitalC (talk) 03:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, I don't know how much I'm going to be around, would you mind watchlisting the FICS article? International Federation of Sports Chiropractic... thanks! DigitalC (talk) 04:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

invite
Drsjpdc (talk)Д-р СДжП,ДС 22:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:BJPalmer2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:BJPalmer2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Chiropractic controversy and criticism
An article that you have been involved in editing, Chiropractic controversy and criticism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. - I am notifying you because you participated in the original AfD. DigitalC (talk) 20:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Harvey Lillard
Hello :) I saw you're quite the expert on chiropractic and wanted to tell you that I'll be creating an article about Harvey Lillard these days. I'll write it here first- if you ever see something not right I'd be more than grateful if you could tell me about it. Regards! -- Jargon ๏̯͡๏) 16:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Harvey Lillard.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Harvey Lillard.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Harvey Lillard.gif
Thank you for uploading File:Harvey Lillard.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Innate Drawing2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Innate Drawing2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:11, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Citizendium approved errors
Hi Matt,

I have recently updated the list, adding a few errors, some of which should be easy to correct.

Regards, HaeB (talk) 05:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:John J. Nugent, D.C..jpg
Thank you for uploading File:John J. Nugent, D.C..jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Chiropractic
Hi! Thought you might be interested in WikiProject_Chiropractic which has just become active today. Would love for you to add your name to our list of members. S EMMENDINGER  ( talk ) 00:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:BJ Palmer.gif


The file File:BJ Palmer.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ddpalmer3.gif


The file File:Ddpalmer3.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Dematt/BCASingh
User:Dematt/BCASingh, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dematt/BCASingh and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Dematt/BCASingh during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Guy (help!) 13:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)