User talk:Swiltsch

An extended welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 23:16, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Thx for the friendly welcome and added information, Ronz! I´ve been using WP as a reader since the early days and have been following the project as well as the policies involved also from the angle of my academic interests in KM & collaborative knowledge creation. - These interests have shifted slightly and are currently mostly centered around learning, creativity and embodied cognition. So far I have refrained from getting into WP editing beyond the occasional (anonymous) spelling correction and link fixing.


 * For the last couple of years, I have been following the articles on various Somatic Learning approaches and specifically the Feldenkrais Method and Moshe Feldenkrais due to my personal explorations of the FM. This has always been accompanied by a curiosity for the available scientific evidence for outcomes as well as critical examination of the explanatory models in use in the light of recent dev. in cognitive science and a growing number of publications in that field related to mindfulness, embodiment, martial arts and contemplative movement practices.


 * Observing the developments and occasional edit warring on the FM article since the publication of the Australian Government Report was rather disenchanting as I came to the impression that quite a few changes were not helping to improve the quality of the article from a reader´s perspective. IMHO this was influenced both by well meaning people from the Feldenkrais community with potential conflicts of interest as well as editors with a rather strict skeptical agenda related to articles on topics bordering to AltMed.


 * I had to smile when I stumbled over the Edzard Ernst BLOG post published after the publication of the report mentioned above - assuming him to be of rather high regard in skeptical AltMed research circles - as some of his points are in contrast to how the sections on the available evidence for and status of the FM are currently rendered.


 * Any support in conducting a conversation with the editors keeping a close watch of the article that contributes to further enhancing the quality of the article for readers interested in the FM is highly appreciated! Swiltsch (talk) 14:18, 6 November 2017 (UTC)