User talk:Psnack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Barefoot Deep Tissue

Barefoot Deep Tissue has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt the subject might not be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability for the relevant concerns. An example of notability guidelines can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (websites). If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 13:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

(response by psnack) If you ask clients who have receive barefoot deep tissue, they may disagree with you. Many practitioners have not used this techinque because they are satisfied with manual therapy, have not had large clients, or ignorant of barefoot and the physiology required to practice it. This modality is better than others for certain situation. I do not know the guidelines for wikipedia, so I will not dispute the article deletion, but I will strongly dispute deletion from a massage article if that happens. Psnack

Hey there. Thanks for the response. I am not the user who proposed the article for deletion, nor am I the admin who carried the deletion out. If you would like the article to be restored, you can find the admin who deleted the article by clicking the redlink to the article, then "deletion log". That says that User:Kungfuadam deleted it as part of the WP:PROD process. Because prod has no formal discussion, any objection stops the deletion process and can reverse it after it's done. So if you think the article did meet Wikipedia guidelines, ask User:Kungfuadam for help.

I really don't remember the article--I simply go thru the list of articles up for deletion and check to make sure that people get notified and directed at relevant policies so they understand why and what they need to do from there. But since someone thought it should be deleted before, someone will likely think so if you have the article restored. So definitely make sure that the article demonstrates the subject's notability to someone who doesn't know anything about it. If someone still wants to delete it, this time it would have to go thru a formal discussion at WP:AFD.

Hope that doesn't sound overly complicated. Let me know if you need help with anything. NickelShoe (Talk) 04:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trigger points and more

Hi, I saw your suggestions on the TrP discussion page. Specifically about starting at the beginning - see my 1st suggestion. Mccready is really not a problem, his opinions are, as far as I can see ill-informed and fairly easy to answer with real evidence. The field is unfortunately strewn with well-meant (as opposed to obnoxious) differences of opinion, but one can but wait and see what happens.

The articles on myofascial pain syndrome and chronic pain are practically useless. Have you read them? --Seejyb 17:36, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[psnack]- Fibromyalgia is a subset of myofascial pain. There are many causes of mps which can be concurrent. There is definite physiological evidence and theory of trigger points, as I note on my site: http://www.svacina.com/triggerpoints.html I don't have time to write about this now. Psnack