Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Katebhom/sandbox

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. BencherliteTalk 12:11, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Katebhom/sandbox


Very fringe POV-pushing content that will never be suitable for wikipedia. Violates MEDRS severly since this is an anti-vaxxor pro-homeopathy piece. Includes the very dangerous recommendation of not taking a vaccine but taking homeopathic products instead. Article is also liberally sprinkled with other nonsense and grand claims. Sources are all unreliable. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)


 * delete anti-vaxxor screed. Editor's only other edit so far was to edit the MMR controversy article to euphemize the Wakefield hoax. Mangoe (talk) 17:22, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

In defense: Never in the article does it say to not vaccinate and references the mal-effects of vaccines as reported by the CDC. The article discusses the method Homeoprophylaxis which has been around for as long as vaccination has. Each reference has been verified and I have read all the science referenced. This article is a pro-protect against infectious disease article. This article offers another alternative to vaccines that is thoroughly reference historically and scientifically. Vaccine science is dated and limited and damaging millions of children world wide. This article is not a propaganda piece. Nor is it based on opinion. Many of the medical references are to articles written prior to the establishment of current day medical journals which does not nullify the research but more puts it in historical perspective. The commentator obviously has very strong emotionally held opinion on homeopathy without regard to its empirical evidence or historical significance. This entry is suitable for Wikipedia as it offers completed definition of homeoprophylaxis: its terms and concepts.

As to the note regarding Wakefield's claims on MMR. His research has been verified and vindicated and a defamation suit against Ernst and others is underway. Sorry I jumped into that one without taking the time to get the appropriate articles.Katebhom (talk) 05:11, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This comment is a damning indictment of this article. IRWolfie- (talk) 08:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

As far as I understand your article on Wakefield is a damming indictment. He has since been absolved of that false accusations by others who have replicated his research before and after his paper.

2. Law A written statement charging a party with the commission of a crime or other offense, drawn up by a prosecuting attorney and found and presented by a grand jury. http://www.trustedhealthproducts.com/blog/wakefield-absolved-sources-of-fraud-accusation-misrepresented-lied-and-hid-facts. Anyways I don't care about your article. I know the truth because I work with autistic children every day. You can change it back and keep propagating the defamation if you like.Katebhom (talk) 00:29, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wakefield has not been absolved of anything. The sources you regard as reliable are merely utterly unreliable for any statement whatsoever. IRWolfie- (talk) 01:39, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Katebhom, what are your plans for this page? Do you intend to move it into mainspace to make an article of it? --BDD (talk) 22:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.