User talk:PatriotsAllTheWay

January 2015
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Sexual addiction, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢ &#124; Maintained) 07:23, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

About your recent edits
It is not so much that I would disagree with your ideas, but there are certain rules of editing Wikipedia. First, we don't delete stuff because we don't like it or because we personally think that it would be wrong. Your edits concern debated issues, and there is more than one side in a debate, so rendering the debate should render the views of all notable parties to that debate. I agree that according to DSM-5 there is no such thing as porn addiction, but 20 or 30 years later DSM-6 or DSM-7 could accept it, since absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, see also WP:BALL. I would advise you to read WP:MEDRS carefully, because for medical claims primary sources are unreliable or much less reliable than secondary sources (such as reviews). Besides, we only accept print-published studies, not studies which have not passed yet through peer-review and there are certain red flags such as lack of being indexed by Medline (which is the gold standard) or PubMed (which indexes pretty much everything that remotely looks like peer-reviewed medical research). Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)