User talk:2600:100C:B0A7:DC3D:751B:28BC:F0B7:6528

June 2025

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Lingzhi (mushroom) have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Lingzhi (mushroom) was changed by 2600:100C:B0A7:DC3D:751B:28BC:F0B7:6528 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.857555 on 2025-06-20T21:33:31+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Ginseng, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop trying to put low-quality sources into articles; alternative medicine journals are unreliable and not used to support medical content, WP:MEDASSESS.

Also note to AintItFunLiving: you and your alternate IP addresses have been reported to admin for WP:SPI with this summary. Please go there or to your talk page to comment and engage with other editors. Please explain why you are not logging in as AintItFunLiving. Zefr (talk) 22:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will log back into that account when I have a chance. I forgot the password but am logged in on a different device. The source you reverted on ginseng was on Medline. Is Medline not sufficient? “No good evidence” is not how the sources you cited typically word the material, for example, on the yohimbine page. I’m concerned mixed evidence is being portrayed as null evidence. I’m very careful to word material in the way that cited sources do. The elision of global approval mechanisms and undue reliance on US sources is also a matter of concern for me. Wikipedia should present things in a neutral and global manner. 2600:100C:B0A7:DC3D:751B:28BC:F0B7:6528 (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of choosing high-quality sources for medical content - particularly on articles for herbs - was explained for you on the talk page of one of your other mobile IP addresses; Special:Diff/1291205109.

Regarding the MedlinePlus articles on Panax ginseng and American ginseng, both say " there is no good scientific evidence to support" using ginseng for clinical purposes. The MedlinePlus source is not a rigorous WP:MEDRS reference, but rather a straightforward summary of science behind ginseng and similar herbs, giving common users a glimpse of information, mostly about safety. More rigorous publications, like a Cochrane review, are rare because the underlying clinical trials on ginseng and other herbs generally have low quality of design and conduct, so are ineligible for a high-quality review or meta-analysis.

The middle paragraph of WP:MEDSCI explains that sources for medical content on Wikipedia should represent the "prevailing medical or scientific consensus", for which nearly all studies of herbs fail to qualify. Zefr (talk) 17:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relation to banned user, Fajkfnjsak

Please explain your similar editing behavior, choice of topics, and possible relationship to the banned user, Fajkfnjsak. Zefr (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.