User talk:Lottiotta
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Talk to meeeee! :) Lottie (talk) 18:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Question, comment
Hi,
Regards this edit, where in the talk page was it established that it was not a pseudoscience? I noticed you posted a comment in a section dating to 2006 and the other sections I didn't see evidence of a consensus that it was not pseudoscience, though my read-through was cursory. Could you give me a link to the specific section so I could read it in its entirety?
Second, you are entitled to simply delete information from your talk page, but generally archiving is preferred (and automatable!)
Thanks, WLU (talk) 16:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- One thing you might want to consider is passing this question past Fyslee on his talk page - he's closer to these kind of debates than I, and is familiar with the page. I would call it pseudoscientific, based more on it's assertion of efficacy (without testing or proof) than anything else, though he may say have a more refined idea of what makes a pseudoscience. WLU (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Tools and resources
Hola,
If you start adding information to the reflexology page, you might coniser using the following tools:
- Citation templates
- pubmed/isbn template generator, incredibly useful, uses the pubmed number or isbn to automatically generate a citation template for you
- Google scholar autocitation, a google-style search engine and reference generator. Useful when the article doesn't have a pubmed number (old, social sciences or humanities).
Citation templates are super handy and clean (plus the above tools do the work for you); simply put the template in the <ref></ref> tags, and it automatically generates a footnote and places the information at the bottom. If you wish to use the same reference several times in the page, cite it in full the first time, but replace <ref> with <ref name = XXXX> (where XXXX is the name of the refernce - you can use anything but it's usually easier if you use the author's name or some recognizable short form, like James, ITG, RTK, whatever). In subsequent citations, use <ref name = XXXX/> (note that it ends in /> not a simple >). Here's an example:
Research in complementary medicine is essential.<ref name = Cornbleet>{{cite journal |author=Cornbleet MA, Ross CS |title=Research in complementary medicine is essential |journal=BMJ |volume=322 |issue=7288 |pages=736–7 |year=2001 |pmid=11293422 |doi=}}</ref> Blah blah blah, but let's not forget that research on complimentary medicine is essential.<ref name = Cornbleet/> ==References== {{Reflist}}
This shows up as:
Research in complementary medicine is essential.[1]
Blah blah blah, but let's not forget that research on complimentary medicine is essential.[1]
- References
- ^ a b Cornbleet MA, Ross CS (2001). "Research in complementary medicine is essential". BMJ 322 (7288): 736–7. PMID 11293422.
And the nice thing is, I used diberry to generate the cornbleet reference after tracking down the pubmed number on pubmed. WLU (talk) 18:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
- reply for you, if you didn't see it, you may want to adjust your preferences to automatically watch pages you edit. I usually do this with user's talk pages, in case they reply to me there (and unwatch a couple days later if there's no evidence they will). WLU (talk) 14:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-