DavidWis
Welcome from Sphilbrick edit
|
Ready when you are edit
I think the article (here) is ready to move. However, once moved, other editors will become aware of it, and may make changes to it, propose changes to it, or even propose it for deletion. I think you should be available to respond, so I am reluctant to move it without knowing when you might be checking in. You haven't added an edit in some time, so you may not be monitoring this article on a regular basis. If you are ready, please post a note at my talk page. I will remove the {{move draft}} template from the article, so someone else doesn't move it before you are ready. If you post a note to me and I don't respond, feel free to put it back.--SPhilbrickT 16:01, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Your nomination at Articles for Creation was a success, and Bonghan System was created.
- Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
- If you would to help us improve this process, please consider
Thank you for helping Wikipedia!
Adding images edit
Images would be a nice addition. Unfortunately, because Wikipedia cares so much about copyright, adding images isn't quite as simple as many would like. I've been around for a couple years, have uploaded several images and arranged for licenses, and I always have to go check the rules whenever I do so.
The good news is that it can be done, and the steps aren't that hard.
Roughly speaking, there are two types of images - ones that are released under some form of a free license, and ones that are still subject to copyright, but can be used in a very limited way under what is called "fair use". Images that can be used under a free license are typically uploaded to a sister project called Commons.
The following link will help you get started if you can obtain the proper license. Commons:First steps. If you have any questions after reading this, I can help.
Here's some information on fair use: Wikipedia:Non-free content. If you think you'll have to go that route, I'll see if I can help, but I'll probably refer you to someone else, because I haven't worked in the fair use area enough to feel certain of my answers.--SPhilbrickT 11:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
This page Wikipedia:Image use policy may also be helpful.--SPhilbrickT 11:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Reverting edit
Before reverting, familiarize yourself with the policies cited. The Bonghan system does not appear to be accepted as a mainstream anatomical structure; citing primary sources to support a medical article is unacceptable. Cite high quality, secondary mainstream medical sources to support the page; those sources, from what I can tell, do not exist. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 20:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bonghan system. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 20:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
- You should also review WP:FRINGE, WP:REDFLAG, WP:MEDRS and WP:UNDUE. The idea that acupuncture has any efficacy is debated. The idea of meridians and qi having merit is even more debated. Wikipedia reports the scholarly mainstream, in proportion to that mainstream. Wikipedia is not the place to advocate or soapbox for new or controversial ideas. If Bonghan systems exist, then they will be explored and researched. There's still a good chance that this represents either pseudoscience or pathological science, given how only a small number of advocates appear able to stain and study them. However, if their findings are replicated and extended, and secondary sources become available, the page can expand to report this. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 00:35, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
some thoughts edit
Some view Wikipedia as not being very friendly to alternative medicine articles. I do not spend any significant time in medical articles, so this is just an impression I've gained from passing comments.
Unfortunately, I'm not a strong support of alternative medicine concepts, which may just be a deficient upbringing, but in any event, I'm not in a position to directly help you.
What I can suggest is that you look at some of the alternative medicine articles, including alternative medicine itself, identify who is contributing to them and discuss some of your concerns on their talk pages. If the concepts in your article have merit (and I'm not in a position to judge), they may be in a better position to help you defend your contributions.
You are relatively new, so on the chance you don't know specifically what to do:
Go to alternative medicine, and click on the "View History tab. This will show you the contributors to the article.
Use the radio buttons to see exactly what each editor added. It's a little tricky at first, but isn't hard. The reason for seeing what they added is that you don't want to waste your time talking to someone who might have simply corrected a spelling, or improved some wikilinks. You want an editor who shows knowledge of the subject matter.
Once you identify some, you can see the "talk" link next to their name. Click on it, and you will be at their talk page, where you can ask for advice.
Anyone who has been around for awhile will know how to see what the article looked like before it was cut back, so don't worry about having to explain to them what you had added.
Sorry I can't be more directly helpful.--SPhilbrickT 21:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Repost of Bonghan system edit
A tag has been placed on Bonghan system requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 14:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Edit-a-thon in Madison edit
.jpg)
I saw that you live in Madison (based on your userpage), so if you're interested, I wanted to invite you to a humanities edit-a-thon in the Madison Public Library on Friday, April 25th (1:30–3:30). It'll be on the shorter side and is aimed at new editors, but I hope to see you there. More information is available on the 2014 UW Conference on the Public Humanities website. Let me know if you have any questions czar ♔ 03:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)