User talk:Drgrisanti

March 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Functional medicine do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.  Teapot  george Talk  22:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Functional medicine, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

May 2011
Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Functional medicine. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. CliffC (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you explain your most recent edit of Functional Medicine
Hello Cliff, I appreciate the guide on your most recent edit. I am confused on something you said in your edit. You commented that I made a controversial edit and did not supply reliable sources. The addition to functional medicine was on the topic of functional medicine laboratory testing. This is the foundation of functional medicine. Just like the ophthalmoscope can not be separated from the practice of optometry, the use of functional medicine labs is an essential part of the practice of functional medicine. This is not a controversial issue. In fact all parties involved in teaching the practice of functional medicine utilize these novel laboratory tests. I want to provide a good overview on the practice of functional medicine and want to follow the appropriate guidelines. Any suggestions on what I should do so I can move forward with developing the functional medicine wikipedia site. Thanks for help. Sincerely, Ron Grisanti


 * Hello Drgrisanti, the message I posted above is somewhat imprecise because it is a template that has been broadly written to avoid reinventing the wheel in similar situations. Elaborating,


 * Any edit made by you other than very minor ones would likely be regarded as controversial, because you have a conflict of interest, as mentioned above, when editing this article. The preferred way to handle a conflict of interest is to declare it, and suggest any changes on the article talk page for discussion by interested parties.  A report concerning the history of the subject article has been filed at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard.
 * As mentioned in the template message, any content added to Wikipedia must be verifiable by citing reliable sources, that's why your most recent addition was deleted. Without such citations, any material added, even material you may consider obvious, may be challenged and removed.  That's how Wikipedia works.  I know from my own editing it can take a lot of work to find good citations, but it will pay off by allowing edits proposed by you to "stick".  Best, CliffC (talk) 01:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Cliff
Cliff, I appreciate your reply.

Thanks... Ron

Does Wikipedia have dual standards for one to provide information
Hello Cliff,

I just viewed the wikipedia functional medicine site and I am surprised my updates have been eliminated. I am not sure why the same rules don't apply to others. It appears I have followed the rules and everything I have provided to add value to functional medicine has been eliminated. In place is information that has little value on the significance of functional medicine. I have been teaching functional medicine for five years and have a position of authority in this field. I understand that their are rules when adding information to wikipedia and am at a loss why my information is deleted and replaced with information that clearly goes against what you have shared with me. The first paragraph from Sanjoy Kumar (Complementary and alternative medicine) on functional medicine is far from accurate and should not represent the true definition of functional medicine. I am at a loss why the following sites are listed in the references. These are websites with no authority on functional medicine. I provided a concise and valuable comment on the value of functional and provided a published (referenced) article published in American Chiropractor journal.

http://www.centerforfunctionalmed.com/nutritional_medicine_orthomolecular_medicine.htm

http://www.centerforfunctionalmed.com/detoxification_heavy_metals.htm

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/functional-medicine-new-kid-on-the-block

Finally, I am disappointed Stephen Barrett, M.D. was provided a position on the functional medicine wikipedia site. Considering his site considers "everything" quackery other than drugs and surgery should be obvious has no credibility.

Cliff, if you happen to be reading this, I am at a loss. Is it even worth adding information to wikipedia if it gets hijacked at every turn.

Any suggestions?

Need helps.

Thanks.

Ron


 * Good morning Drgrisanti. I can't explain edits made by other editors (the article history page here may help).  I suggest that you post what you've just written at Talk:Functional medicine to get feedback from those who watch the article.  That would also be the place to question whether the Sanjoy Pal source for the article's definition of functional medicine is a reliable one, and to suggest a cited alternative.  Best, CliffC (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Functional medicine
The issue is you removed an independent source and content from the lead. Thus I have reverted your changes. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You could ask for further opinions at WT:MED Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 00:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)