Archives

1

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Health and fitness C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Georgia (U.S. state): Atlanta C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Atlanta task force (assessed as High-importance). Atlanta task force To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : Rate Atlanta related articles from Unassessed Atlanta articles and Category:Unknown-importance Atlanta articles. Citing sources : Unreferenced Atlanta articles Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Infobox : Atlanta articles without infoboxes Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Atlanta Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Atlanta Stubs : Work on stubs in Category:Atlanta stubs. Other : * Help out with articles placed in Category:Atlanta articles needing attention Add {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)|class=|importance=|atlanta=|atlanta-importance=}} project banner to Atlanta-related articles to talk pages and assess. Maintain and further improve articles already of high-quality. Get Atlanta into Featured article status. Improve groups of articles to meet the standards for a Good or Featured Topic. WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)... Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles. Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category. Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state) Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state) Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs. Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner. Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard United States: Government C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance). Disaster management C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The first sentence in the following content is being edit warred over:

• added the first time here by Sahrin on Aug 10: "Add explanation of why people oppose the amendment"
• removed here by an IP Aug 26: "unreferenced, and has problems with WP:OR and WP:NPOV"
• restored here by Sahrin Aug 27: "revert possible vandalism"
• removed here by me Aug 27: "that is indeed unsourced editorializing that someone added to the article, and should be removed"
• restored here by Sahrin Aug 30: "The source is given in the line. Gun zealots are taking over this page. Guys, what is it you hope to accomplish here?"
• removed here by me Aug 30: "see discussion on talk and see your Talk page"

Many oppose the amendment, because it specifically bans the CDC from reporting results that suggest gun control would reduce violence, effectively censoring scientists from telling the truth. The U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee rejected an amendment, which would have provided $10 million in funding ear-marked for gun violence research.^[1][2]

I do not find the first sentence is supported by the sources. The "many" is especially unfortunate here. I invite those who do who find this supported, to explain how. Jytdog (talk) 01:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would support something like "Advocates for gun control oppose the amendment. Also, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, sent a letter to the leaders of the Senate Appropriations Committee in 2013 asking them "to support at least $10 million within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in FY 2014 along with sufficient new funding at the National Institutes of Health to support research into the causes and prevention of gun violence. Furthermore, we urge Members to oppose any efforts to reduce, eliminate, or condition CDC funding related to gun violence prevention research."" That would be fully supported by the sources. Jytdog (talk) 01:51, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• restored again here by Sahrin with edit note: "Since the section is disputed, I am reverting to the original version of the article before the article was brigaded by revisionist gun types"
• reverted again here by Del nk with edit note: "this is the consensus version".

User:Sahrin you need to come here and discuss. Jytdog (talk) 17:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The edit warring to repeatedly introduce the phrase "censoring scientists from telling the truth" is inappropriate as it is clearly non-WP:NPOV. I have no objection to adding in the notable opinion of the AMA, APA, and AAP. Deli nk (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• added again here by Sahrin with edit note: "Attempting to intimidate another editor is extremely inappropriate" Jytdog (talk) 20:54, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not participating in this content dispute, except to point out that the warred over addition is not even factually correct, let alone NPOV. The Dickey Amendment has been quoted in its entirety in the stable version of the article - it is precisely as short and vague as it sounds. To claim that this amendment "specifically bans the CDC from reporting results that suggest gun control would reduce violence" is false nearly to the point of vandalism. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I won't go to vandalism but it is definitely unverified. Do you have any thoughts on the compromise proposal above User:Someguy1221? Jytdog (talk) 00:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since I blocked Sahrin for edit warring, I'd rather not get too involved, even after the fact. Except to say that the proposal does appear NPOV, and that stating a subjective impact of the law in Wikipedia's voice is obviously not. I classified that statement as nearly vandalism instead of unverified since the text of the Dickey Amendment is not a matter for debate - anyone can look it up online and read what it says, though I suspect the author of that statement was simply uninformed or being figurative, rather than deliberately lying. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I didn't know that; sorry I would not have asked. Jytdog (talk) 01:49, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• note, i implemented the proposed language above here. Jytdog (talk) 02:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So Jytdog's and Someguy1221's harassment and witch hunt ended in a 24-hour ban. I'm back now, though, and am here to recommend we delete the section in question entirely. According to the text of the section as written, the "controversy" is a dispute over a $10M line item in the budget of an agency with a $7B budget. You guys continuously insist that there is no evidence for my contention (that the Dickey Amendment requires that researchers not report results that show gun control would reduce gun violence) - despite the fact that two separate news articles already included in the references for the current version of the text discuss this specific concern (that it will have a chilling effect on research). OK, so there is no chilling effect (or at least we can't write about it in the article). Then where's the controversy? As written, the article suggests that a dispute between different entities over a line item in the budget is a controversy. Are we really going to write a controversy stub for every single line item in the CDC budget? It's not noteworthy. I'm going to blank the section after a reasonable period of time without further comment. Sahrin (talk) 03:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]