Talk:Acupuncture detoxification
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Recent edits
I restored the link to NADA at [1]. It's not advertising according to Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox. Also, NADA is a nonprofit organization, fwiw.
Category:pseudoscience is imo not appropriate for acupuncture-related articles; cf. WP's categorization guidelines and NPOV regarding categories. The main article on acupuncture presents scientific evidence for acupuncture as well as some criticisms that acupuncture's traditional theory is pseudoscientific. I've commented elsewhere on why labelling such topics as "pseudoscience" via use of the category may violate NPOV. IMO, it's better in such cases to present different sides of arguments about pseudoscience in the body of the article, cf. paragraph just added at the end.
I've deleted the proposal to merge, for now, for two reasons: (1) I'm adding third-party verification to the article that shows its notability (see proposed guideline for organizations at WP:ORG). (2) The article to which the merger was proposed, Acupuncture, is already too long. It's ripe to have stuff spun off from it, not to have stuff merged into it.
If editors believe that the revised article should still be merged, please feel free to add the tag again and discuss. Thanks, Jim Butler(talk) 06:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
