User talk:Revitalizer



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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, try Questions, ask me on my talk page, or.
 * Quick introduction to Wikipedia
 * How to write a great article
 * Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia, an essay from PLOS Computational Biology
 * Identifying reliable sources for medicine-related articles (general advice)
 * Wikipedia's Manual of Style for medicine-related articles (general style guide)
 * A few tricks to help you format references are at WP:MEDHOW

''If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to visit the Medicine Portal. If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).''

Again, welcome! Jytdog (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

"Activated" phenolics
Revitalizer: please abandon your idea that something physiologically relevant exists when polyphenols are "activated". No science supports this idea. In the stomach environment of acids and enzymes, polyphenols are cleaved to become smaller phenolic units whose fate in the body is difficult to assess with current methods. But it is known that such smaller phenolic compounds are rapidly metabolized and excreted, indicating that the body doesn't want them for a physiological role. There exists no evidence that phenolics are "activated" or that they have any significance to human health. Please familiarize yourself with the requirements for sourcing via WP:SCIRS. --Zefr (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Zefr: perhaps familiar yourself with this article: You mentioned that it is difficult to assess with current methods, however, similarly you do not have substantiation for what you claimed. Beside the part of the article that describes superfood offers a clear reasoning as to why superfood do not have substantiated health claims which is along the line of what you described, so based on your own argument, this section should remain. Also, I am curious as to which research institution or university you are affiliated with.Revitalizer (talk) 05:11, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * http://www.freshfruitportal.com/news/2011/03/03/australian-scientists-confirm-apple-peels-fight-cancer/
 * https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/36863
 * http://polyphenols-site.com/2014/news/polyphenols-valorisation-wastebyproducts-from-apple-and-many-others-fruits-a-vegetables-will-be-highlighted-in-paris-polyphenols-2012
 * http://www.australasianscience.com.au/article/issue-september-and-october-2010/fruit-waste-fights-cancer.html


 * This topic has been extensively evaluated in the USA and Europe, with this review by EFSA as the most comprehensive work concluding that there is little evidence to show a cause-and-effect relationship between ingested polyphenols and a measureable physiological response; only an effect of olive oil hydroxytyrosol on cholesterol levels has been adequately demonstrated to date. This Wikipedia summary already exists to state what you are proposing. Also, please do not keep repeatedly reverting my edits -- this is edit warring, WP:WAR, which results when no consensus exists, yet one editor -- you -- tries to restore an article having no agreement, WP:CON. Your edits today on the Activated phenolics page are more opinion, original research and essay writing (perhaps for a class you are taking), rather than encyclopedic material; see WP:OR. --Zefr (talk) 15:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

The same way you put your references, I also put my references. Frankly you do not seem to know the recent development in this area. Please stop deleting my entry, this is warring. which results when no consensus exists, yet one editor -- you -- tries to delete an article having no agreement. Again, I am curious which university are you a researcher at?Revitalizer (talk) 22:50, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Part of the problem with your edits, is the sources you are bringing. We have a pretty objective way that we evaluate sources -- please read WP:MEDRS. If you don't understand anything there, please feel free to ask me, or someone else.  Zefr understands MEDRS very well, and can answer your questions too. Jytdog (talk) 21:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring
Please stop. If you continue to revert the edits of a dissenting editor with whom you cannot obtain consensus, or obtain consenting editorial support for your point of view as occurring on the page Activated phenolics, you will be blocked from editing. Please post your reasons for reverts on the Talk page. --Zefr (talk) 01:00, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Delete Warring
Please stop deleting. I have given you reasons and referenced scientific studies. You clearly are not from scientific community and as I asked several times, which institution do you have affiliation with?Revitalizer (talk) 01:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not an appropriate question here in Wikipedia, Revitalizer, and no one is going to respond to it. Jytdog (talk) 21:44, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Revitalizer
Like some other editors you have been interacting with so far here in Wikipedia, I am a member of WP:WikiProject Medicine - there are several "WikiProjects" here, which are more-or-less formal groups of editors with similar interests, who work together to create and improve articles on a given topic. I provided you with our welcome message away up at the top of this page.

I've reviewed your edits so far. You clearly have an interest in plant polyphenols and their health effects. I was initially concerned that you were editing here on behalf of some company (your username is actually the name of a dietary supplement that was banned by the FDA and other health authorities, for illegally containing a drug substance), and we get a lot of supplement company representatives coming to Wikipedia to try to add marketing material to articles about things like antioxidants and polyphenols. But I don't think you are doing that; some of the content you have added offers your opinion that these supplements are not nearly as good sources as things like apples, like you said in this edit.

That said, the reason why your edits are getting rejected, is that, well... they are bad edits, here in Wikipedia.  Working in Wikipedia is very, very different from any other kind of scientific writing. It is nothing like writing up a research article or writing a review article for publication.

It is great that you want to contribute - really great! - but instead of fighting and arguing, the best thing to do, would be to ask people what is wrong with your edits, and really listen to the answers, and try to learn what good Wikipedia editing is. Right now, you don't know. I hope you will consider slowing down and trying to learn. You can start by reading the links in the Welcome message I left at the top of this page. If you have any questions (real questions about how Wikipedia works) I would be happy to help you. I can also provide you a brief overview of how Wikipedia works -- if you want that, you can just reply here and I will reply. In any case, good luck! Jytdog (talk) 21:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)