Jump to content

Talk:Domestic Muscovy duck

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge Discussion

[edit]

Merge talk here..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muscovy_duck#Merge_Domestic_muscovy_duck_here 22:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)Wingman1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talkcontribs)

Oscillococcinum

[edit]

At Talk:Muscovy duck the consensus seems to be to remove all mention of this homeopathic preparation. I think we should do the same here. jps (talk) 12:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No objection from me. I'd already diluted it, but was reverted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Diluted to minute quantities, which is still too much ;)
The sourcing requirements of WP:ONEWAY apply here just as in the article Muscovy duck, so as it stands it now, it has to go. Paul Offit's little piece could probably used as an enrichment for Oscillococcinum. –Austronesier (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, delete it. Homeopaths dilute everything they can grab and some things the cannot grab: Sunlight, black holes and so on. We should never mention in an article about X that homeopaths dilute it. --Hob Gadling (talk) 16:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Never? That's not what WP:ONEWAY says. The provision is that independent reliable sources about X mention it "in a serious and prominent way". They rarely do for obvious reasons, so don't worry anyway. :)–Austronesier (talk) 16:38, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Crappy article redirected, then recrappified

[edit]

Um, we all agreed this was a crappy article. I compared it with the section in Muscovy duck, which was (and is) appreciably better cited. Given that the citation standard here was ... not worth speaking about, I boldly redirected. Only to find it un-redirected, i.e. recrappified to its original stinking state. I can't be bothered with it, frankly, but anyone with energy for the task can attempt a merge as we don't need two articles where one will do better. I wish that person luck trying to find anything remotely reusable in the existing text here, but one lives in hope, maybe there's something. Signing off (don't ping me), Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]