User talk:Jan Jakea

Talk with me, please!
Welcome!

Hello,, 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: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Jakew 19:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Circumcision
Dear Jan. The same text also says "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision". The problem with the removed fragment is not the source, the problem is citing a single piece of it to use it in order to defend a personal opinion. Unfortunately context is an important issue when dealing with citations. The most fair thing to do would be to use the whole concluding statement of the cited source "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided". Or maybe if you really want to stick to the decision making process on the introduction of the article (which to me seems to be a place a little bit premature to introduce the topic) as it seems to be the case, why not use the following citation from the same source: "Studies from the 1980s suggested that the presentation of medical information on the potential advantages and disadvantages of circumcision had little influence on parents' decisions" citation from the same text that apparently shows better what you want to convey (i.e. that people don't change their opinion about the topic in spite on any medical evidence which might be presented. This is probably the same thing but expressed in a more neutral way.

Tit for tat/Subversive element
You shouldn't be creating new sockpuppets to get around your ban, should you? And you shouldn't be making edits like this either; they just prove the point. Jayjg (talk) 07:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)