User talk:Posturewriter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Posturewriter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! JFW | T@lk 21:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Chronic fatigue syndrome

Your addition to chronic fatigue syndrome has now been removed twice. While I'm sure you've made your contribution in good faith, other contributors question whether this theory is sufficiently notable and supported by evidence to be included, and removed the contribution in equally good faith.

Could I persuade you to read Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle? This guideline outlines the most constructive approach to these disputes.

Wikipedia functions by consensus between contributors. If you could leave a message on Talk:Chronic fatigue syndrome, outlining your views and relevant sources, you might be able to convince others of the need to include the posture theory. JFW | T@lk 21:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Da Costa's syndrome

I think the same as above applies to Da Costa's syndrome. Given your own commitment to, and research in the area of, the postural compression theory, there's a conflict of interest in your expanding the article in ways supporting that theory. It would be preferable, per WP:COI, to discuss it on the Talk page and let a consensus of other editors decide on how much of the article, if any, to devote to it. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 00:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Da Costa's syndrome, again

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Da Costa's syndrome. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. I have reverted your latest attempt to include this information in the article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Da Costa's syndrome and cruft

I've added the template: "This article or section may contain an excessive amount of information with limited interest or intricate details".

I and other editors have said previously that the article was becoming bloated, and it's getting no better with your addition of huge unreadable dumps of material from papers.

The aim of Wikipedia is to produce accessible articles for intelligent lay readers. Please can you cooperate in reducing the article size? Gordonofcartoon (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Persistent copyright issues

On WP:COIN you have not wanted to clarify whether you are associated with M.A. Banfield (despite circumstantial evidence to the contrary). This makes it very hard to judge whether your most recent additions to Da Costa's syndrome constitute copyright violations or not. Even if you are the owner of the website on the Posture Theory (http://users.sa.chariot.net.au/~posture/), you must release content under the GNU Free Documentation Licence if you want to incorporate it into Wikipedia. It matters not as to whether you make small alterations to make the text look like it is original content.

In the past, users who have failed to comply with due progress on Wikipedia have had their accounts suspended. I believe there are a number of contributors trying very hard to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I thought I should let you know that many of your edits are seen to be attempts at promotion of a non-notable or original theory, for which a general-purpose encyclopedia is not an outlet.

As far as I am concerned this is the last in a string of warnings. JFW | T@lk 12:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disruptive editing at Da Costa's syndrome

An editor at the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard has suggested there that you are editing against consensus, and promoting your own personal research and publications. If you want to avoid further involvement with administrators, I recommend that you stop editing the article, and confine your remarks to the Talk page. If you continue editing the article against the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guideline, you risk being blocked for disruptive editing. EdJohnston (talk) 02:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 04:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DCS today

Hi Posturewriter,

The talk page at Da Costa's syndrome has been very active, and I didn't want you to miss my note to you. If there are any other sources that can support a distinction between these various labels, please let me know, or add it yourself. I'd hate to leave it at "Paul says" if there really are a lot of people using some of the labels to mean significantly different things.

(Guido's been blocked for a week over edit warring, and claims that he's going to be off wiki for a month, so the talk page should return to normal for a while.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Online sources

Re [1]. Drop it, waste of time. These particular sources are completely unreliable: see here. Also remember that m - for minor edit - is reserved for edits like spelling mistakes that no-one, whatever their stance, could possibly object to. It doesn't cover expanding articles from dubious sources. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Syndromes

So Da Costa's syndrome says, "Symptoms of Da Costa's syndrome include fatigue upon exertion, shortness of breath, palpitations, sweating, and chest pain." I'd like to hear your personal opinion on whether this list of symptoms sounds like DCS to you. The first ones are pretty obvious matches:

  • Exercise intolerance
  • Significant fatigue (without having done anything that should cause it)
  • Feeling like you can't get a satisfying breath
  • Heartbeat goes up dramatically (≥ 30 bpm) for no cause (when doing "nothing", like standing in line at the grocery store)
  • Chest pain or discomfort

Here are the less obviously connected ones:

  • Lightheadedness and dizziness (particularly when standing still, exercising, or standing up suddenly)
  • Fainting or feeling faint (particularly on warm days, when tired, when slightly dehydrated, or when standing still)
  • Perceived muscle weakness (=seems that way, but still normal strength on a test)
  • Occasional tingling in hands and feet
  • Abdominal problems, such as nausea or pain
  • Problems with impaired concentration ("brain fog") or sleep disorders
  • Problems with flushing (and therefore sweating), chills, overheating, and/or cold hands and feet

As with DCS, not every person will have all symptoms. So think about a couple of specific DCS patients, and let me know whether you think this might be a somewhat more complete picture of their symptoms than the short list in the DCS article right now.

Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)