User talk:Nimbow7

CFL article edits

Welcome and thanks for you edits. I wanted to discuss some of the text you recently added to Compact fluorescent lamp. The opposition sub-heading rightly belongs in the Phase-out of incandescent light bulbs. The broken bulb section with its extensive 'how-to' guidance has been removed per WP:NOT. Essentially Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal or an indiscriminate collection of information. Plus the article already contained a section on disposal. Again welcome and I look forward to your future contributions. Nja²⁴⁷ 07:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note 2

You added an extensive health effects section, mainly sourced from SCENIHR. I have a few queries.

My first example is of migraine, where you wrote 'Blue light, such as that emitted by CFLs, can potentially aggrevate migraine, and fluorescent lamps can cause eye-strain and headache'. Though the document from SCENIHR says in the conclusion on migraines 'Scientific support for aggravating symptoms by flicker from fluorescent tubes was not found [Evidence level D]. There is anecdotal evidence of problems with blue light [Evidence level D].'
Dyslexia - the text you've included into Wikipedia is only part of the conclusion from the source. The source says: 'It is has been shown that dyslectics and Irlen-Meares patients tend to have difficulties detecting flicker. Therefore, flicker from fluorescent tubes should not be a problem [Evidence level A]. There are self-reported indications that the condition is aggravated by mainly UV and blue light [Evidence level D].' Again, you've only included part of the findings, which unfortunately distorts things and is therefore not within Wikipedia inclusion policy and guidelines.

I am not going to go through everything you wrote, instead I've removed it pending clarification from you. If it's to be re-added, then keep in mind that this is an encyclopaedia and evidence submitted is subject to scrutiny and must be verifiable and must not be written in a way that distorts the findings. Can you explain why you wrote it as you did, or if you wish to re-add then possibly expand to clarify the information with the full findings. Thank you. Nja²⁴⁷ 08:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, after further thought, I think if the text were to be re-added, ie after complete disclosure of what the source actually says, consideration would need to be paid to WP:UNDUE. Thus, information on possible health effects, etc may well be best placed in a separate off-shoot article. Nja²⁴⁷ 13:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

I ask that you please don't refer to people as nazi's, as you did here. Wikipedia has a policy on civility. Nja²⁴⁷ 19:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]