User talk:Demurherbs

March 2021
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Blood sugar level, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''You should read WP:MEDRS and WP:WHYMEDRS before further editing. Those are guides for choosing sources for medical content. You added nonsense about herbs affecting blood sugar. Those and other edits you made have been reverted.'' Zefr (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I have seen WebMD used in other articles that I have read on Wikipedia so I thought it was reliable. We don't need review sources to state facts like "cinnamon has been studied and results were mixed". Your edit to sauna suit were detrimental and in conflict with the spirit of WP:MEDRS by removing the explanation from the spam section promoting the use of sauna suits for weight loss as "A sauna suit is commonly worn during physical exercise as an aid to weight loss". While demanding a review source for "loss of weight by inducing excessive sweating is temporary" you left this supposed WP:MEDRS that you left in the article: https://maxfitnessplus.com/best-sauna-suit-reviews/. If you don't like my changes maybe you should go over it yourself before someone expires from the bad advice they received in our article. Demurherbs (talk) 03:42, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * On my talk page, you said: Is a randomized controlled trial WP:MEDRS for this sentence in the sauna suit article: " A 2017 study[3] at Western Colorado University found that wearing a sauna suit while exercising increased fat loss, improved cardiovascular health and boosted muscle performance." These suits are banned by the NCAA and the deaths of several athletes have been attributed to the suits. And you're worried about cinnamon tea?
 * One small university study is not MEDRS-compliant, but rather is the most basic huam research - a review published in a medical journal would be needed. It would be better to cite a NCAA source banning the suits. See the health effects of tea article - there are no medical effects of consuming tea, although cinnamon tea is pleasant enough. Zefr (talk) 04:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I cited NCAA and CDC and removed everything else for sauna suit. The real nonsense is this argument that foods don't effect blood sugar. Maybe I added it to the wrong section (regulation) but you could have helped by moving it to a better section instead of deleting it and calling it "nonsense". Why are you only reverting my edits when there is so much non-MEDRS in the article already? Demurherbs (talk) 04:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

A lengthy welcome
Hi Demurherbs. Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily in collaboration.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Hipal (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Hey Hipal, thanks for the welcome. I don't have any "relationship" with the topics I've edited about and I'm not planning to edit any biographies. I don't mind your sharing your views at all and I will take your advice to work on less contentious topics, but I still disagree with Zefr's actions here. He removed this as "misinformation": Soluble fiber can lower blood glucose levels even though there are reviews for this like this one that I didn't cite. The citation I gave to the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health should have been enough. I have never seen them publish anything that you would not be able to find in a review or that was not established in mainstream practice. Demurherbs (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

He is also adding "citation needed" tags to content that is already cited. Demurherbs (talk) 05:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)