Talk:Spa bath
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject on Alternative Medicine. Please visit the project page for more details, or ask questions on talk. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Detox
intersting, and deep study on electro-spa-bath, I assume a little difficult to understand for people with little knowlewdge on chemistry, but good supply of information for the operator of spa bath such as therapeutics and medical personnel.194.176.105.39 11:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] July 2007
[edit] Copyedit
 |
This article, or a portion of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors in July 2007. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
I have done a preliminary run through for spelling only. It seems to have been written by someone French, possibly translating from another article. Fixed many spelling errors.
Article still in need of an expert to verify claims, and data. Ariel♥Gold 17:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- 18-Oct-2007: I spent (too many) hours editing the article to adjust verbs and added many hyphens or commas for clarity, because many sentences contained over 7 phrases. I think the wording is acceptable now, so I lowered the {{Copyedit...}} tag to the middle of the article. The adjusted verbs seemed to reflect awkward translation from foreign languages: many cited sources are in German and some are Russian. It seems I spent 4 hours to fix wording, so I did not embed footnotes or verify source/Google reports about electrolysis baths. I've also added the #expr calculation to show "113" degrees F. -Wikid77 06:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] technical report on DETOX-systems
why not have also a deep and sound technical report in wickipedia backed up by numerous technical sources? The sources are reliable, taken from PUBMED database or the US based EPA. However should be made better retrievable. I think the articles provides good and useful information for every one, i.e. people having a technical knowledge as well as non technical readers. If it is extended the information is diluted. It is already rather long.Mikoyoxa 16:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tooo technical ???
Wikipedia is not only for the 89% of personalities representing the area under the Gaussian curve but also for the rest of the preople- who ever they are - althought Wikipedia is not democratic. As a memeber of the the little rest of the memebers I apreciate technical informatian being ready availabable without complicated passwords as in other database. Do not dilute the original information any more.82.212.47.19 21:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Detailed not too technical
18-Oct-2007: I have been editing several technical articles (such as "Discrete Fourier transform") to add simplified wording, but this article "Spa bath" is not too technical, just detailed in content. The article doesn't even mention "alkaline" (or "surfactant"). Actual overly technical articles typically have more than 3 rare terms in a sentence (such as aquifer, aquitard & aquiclude) or contain numerous mathematical formulas; however, this article doesn't involve any of those technical issues. I have removed tag "{{technical}}" and suggested writing a more detailed analysis as to why the article is troublesome. Please don't tag an article as "technical" just because it contains detailed information. -Wikid77 05:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
