| Revision as of 14:14, 1 January 2007 editValjean (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers95,275 edits →Excellent idea!← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:16, 2 January 2007 edit undoDematt (talk | contribs)5,093 edits QuestionNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| I don't know how you have found all these articles, but when the Quackery category was deleted, a few (some obviously pro quackery) editors immediately removed the category tag from a whole lot of articles. It was proper for them to do so, since that category had been deleted, but I suspect they did it with glee! I suspect that many of the articles you already list are among them, but by following those editors' tracks, we might be able to find more. Just watch my edit history and you'll be able to figure out what was going on and who deleted the category tag. Then follow their tracks. If you will please activate your email, I'll email you the names to watch. Let me know on my user page. -- ] 09:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC) | I don't know how you have found all these articles, but when the Quackery category was deleted, a few (some obviously pro quackery) editors immediately removed the category tag from a whole lot of articles. It was proper for them to do so, since that category had been deleted, but I suspect they did it with glee! I suspect that many of the articles you already list are among them, but by following those editors' tracks, we might be able to find more. Just watch my edit history and you'll be able to figure out what was going on and who deleted the category tag. Then follow their tracks. If you will please activate your email, I'll email you the names to watch. Let me know on my user page. -- ] 09:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == Question == | |||
| Is this just a list or should we be adding some sort of NPOV statements along with each. Even medicine has elements of quackery, while chiropractic has elements that are not. How do we handle that? --] 03:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:16, 2 January 2007
Excellent idea!
Hi QuackGuru. Congratulations are in order, and Happy New Year! I expect this could be a parallel to the List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts. The concepts are often related, but not identical.
I don't know how you have found all these articles, but when the Quackery category was deleted, a few (some obviously pro quackery) editors immediately removed the category tag from a whole lot of articles. It was proper for them to do so, since that category had been deleted, but I suspect they did it with glee! I suspect that many of the articles you already list are among them, but by following those editors' tracks, we might be able to find more. Just watch my edit history and you'll be able to figure out what was going on and who deleted the category tag. Then follow their tracks. If you will please activate your email, I'll email you the names to watch. Let me know on my user page. -- Fyslee 09:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Question
Is this just a list or should we be adding some sort of NPOV statements along with each. Even medicine has elements of quackery, while chiropractic has elements that are not. How do we handle that? --Dematt 03:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)