This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Obankston ( talk) 20:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I believe the including of a reference to the quackery article doesn't add anything to the list, but what it does do is cast a negative light on the article in general. Anyone reading it will see that quackery has been included amongst the other things, and will be lead to think of the other articles referred to in that light (a negative one). As an encyclopaedia, I believe this article would be greatly improved by removing the reference to quackery. Whether or not it all is quackery or not. Thoughts? Mlaclom1 ( talk) 14:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Some "see also" links were merged up and various links to redirects were made to link directly at the relevant article. This also results in multiple links to common articles. — Paleo Neonate – 14:46, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Obankston ( talk) 20:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I believe the including of a reference to the quackery article doesn't add anything to the list, but what it does do is cast a negative light on the article in general. Anyone reading it will see that quackery has been included amongst the other things, and will be lead to think of the other articles referred to in that light (a negative one). As an encyclopaedia, I believe this article would be greatly improved by removing the reference to quackery. Whether or not it all is quackery or not. Thoughts? Mlaclom1 ( talk) 14:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Some "see also" links were merged up and various links to redirects were made to link directly at the relevant article. This also results in multiple links to common articles. — Paleo Neonate – 14:46, 19 July 2018 (UTC)