User talk:Holaema

Welcome!
Hello, Holaema, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Applied kinesiology
You have thrown down the gauntlet, and I have taken it up. Please enter the discussion at Talk:Applied kinesiology. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

NPOV-Applied Kinesiology
The main reason that I offered this flag was not to dispute the factual information already in place, but that basic content about AK and Clinical Kinesiology theory and methods is lacking, and that this lack contributes to the article's overall taste as biased in conjunction with the particular placement and use of parenthesis and words/phrases that add a negative connotation, rather than straight-forward facts. The statements in the opening paragraph are certainly informative, however would they not be more appropriately placed in the 'Criticism' section? The use of parenthesis in the History and Current use section, regarding ICAK also seems unnecessary, and meant to express the author's opinion about the nature of the organization, its people and activities - i.e. "certified", "diplomats". I could also be reading into this, but as a common wikipedia viewer, I am probably not the only person to process the use of punctuation as a method to maintain a tone of opinionated skepticism. Also see: "The essential premise of applied kinesiology, which is not shared by mainstream medical theory..." - this phrase seems unnecessary, and further reinforces, what appears to be the overall slant of the article. These are a few examples of why I placed the NPOV. I think the content already in place has the potential to read and inform in a more expansive way through reorganization and with additions to the text.

As you pointed out that I am a first-time editor, so I appreciate your patience with my kindergarten like-style of jumping in to this discussion. If there is a more appropriate way to do so, I will be happy to follow that avenue since I am just one voice of many in an old discussion here. If it is not appropriate for me to have placed a NPOV on the article, than I will remove it. (Holaema (talk) 23:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC))

Disappearing Message
I tried to respond to WikiDan's "gauntlet being thrown down again" via "message me", kindly please tell - where did my message go? I would like to post it as I am supposed to via talk. Thank you! (Holaema (talk) 22:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC))
 * You did it right, your message went to WikiDan61's talk page at User talk:WikiDan61 and you can see it at the bottom of that page. Your first message was not clear because you did not give it a header (I have now added one) so it looked like a continuation of the previous one, and you did not sign it with ~ ; but you got both those things right on the second short message below it, so you are evidently learning! The easiest way to add a new message to a talk page is to click on the "New section" tab at the top: that gives you a form with spaces for header and message, and formats it all properly at the bottom of the page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 23:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so very much - this is a whole new language, as I has quickly become apparent; I will do my best "as in Rome"!