Talk:Diabetic sock

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Lately"

"Lately" is problematic. It is too transient to use in a wikipedia article. I'm at a loss at the moment for how to re-word this.Astonzia (talk) 15:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV

As with Mike Rosoft [1], I agree that the rewrite appeared overly promotional, contradicting or removing previous information, and changing the pov almost completely. Without more references, it's unclear what changes should be made. --Ronz (talk) 17:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted again. Yes, the article could use a rewrite, but nothing should be added that contradicts the one source without a proper source of its own. --Ronz (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same problem with the recent ip edits, plus copyright violations. --Ronz (talk) 21:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More of the same editing from the ip. I've tagged all the changes. I'd like others' opinions on how problematic the material is. --Ronz (talk) 17:29, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion: A bit silly to give a 3O when there's no opposing voice, but whatever. Honestly I find the entire Choosing a diabetic sock section to be promotional. Also, remember that Wikipedia is not a how-to, and text like "Any choice of diabetic sock should always be discussed with one's podiatrist to determine the proper sock for the patient's condition." is really just weird. I've gone back to the earlier version that I think was better, but I've tagged it as advert anyway. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:39, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was looking for an option other than having the ip blocked. --Ronz (talk) 18:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested the ip be blocked after the most recent edit-warring. --Ronz (talk) 18:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"See also" wording for compression stockings

The "See also" section currently contains an entry which reads: Compression stockings, which provide the opposite features

This may be a bit misleading, as some cursory Web searching suggests that there exist compression stockings designed to be safe for diabetics. How could the wording here be improved? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 04:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]