Wikipedia - Electronic cigarette
- Thread starter Petrodus
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Better than saying "We are all gonna die"
I agree but you gotta take what you can get
I agree but you gotta take what you can get
Contact the author of the page and ask if he/she will add links to CASAA and ECF.
why not just edit it?
I just edited the info on the FDA study.
Just be careful not to change it too drastically... be honest, write the facts... DO NOT write biased opinion statements...
They will be seen as biased vandalism and deleted.
I never thought about fighting our PR fight on wikipedia... but it's not a bad Idea... people trust it. and people looking for information on what an ecig is will find it.
I just edited the info on the FDA study.
Just be careful not to change it too drastically... be honest, write the facts... DO NOT write biased opinion statements...
They will be seen as biased vandalism and deleted.
I never thought about fighting our PR fight on wikipedia... but it's not a bad Idea... people trust it. and people looking for information on what an ecig is will find it.
Wikipedia is a MAJOR reference site
maybe someone in CASAA who is familiar
with editing Wikipedia could step up and edit this
to insure the text is accurate.
Last edited:
I'll keep an eye on it... I'll comb through it tonight and make sure it's right... then watch it for ANTZ vandalism.
Check out the "edit this article" and "talk." Verrrrrrry interrrrrestinggggg... Looks like some major editing has been done in the last month.
Wikipedia should not in anyway be a platform for those opposed to e-cigarettes.
That includes the garbage lies that e-smoking MIGHT not be as dangerous as smoking
and the benefits haven't been proven.
Edits should be made by those with the facts and I suggest edits
should be written by or at least approved by CASAA to insure
accuracy as well as professionalism.
Edit
Of course we should monitor Wikipedia
to insure the FDA Lovers ... or possibly FDA officials
and others ... don't play games with their edits.
That includes the garbage lies that e-smoking MIGHT not be as dangerous as smoking
and the benefits haven't been proven.
Edits should be made by those with the facts and I suggest edits
should be written by or at least approved by CASAA to insure
accuracy as well as professionalism.
Edit
Of course we should monitor Wikipedia
to insure the FDA Lovers ... or possibly FDA officials
and others ... don't play games with their edits.
Last edited:
I see Drexel is not referenced ..... I think that should be put right..... It is newer than almost all the other refs.
I agree with Petrodus so I will not be doing it myself.
I agree with Petrodus so I will not be doing it myself.
Upon further consideration...
I'm not level headed enough to edit this on a consistent basis.
I'll watch it for vandalism... but adding or editing content to frame a more balanced point of view(Drexel Study), will have to rely on someone else
I'm not level headed enough to edit this on a consistent basis.
I'll watch it for vandalism... but adding or editing content to frame a more balanced point of view(Drexel Study), will have to rely on someone else
I agree completely. Wikipedia is probably the best outreach resource we have and this article on ecigs should be informative, accurate and unbiased. And yes, we should definitely add a section on the Burstyn study.
Somebody at CASAA please look into this.
There's this - E-Cig Wiki
I think text-based black web pages suck though :shrug:
EDIT - The main wikipedia page is the most popular wiki we'll ever have.
Any other wiki page will never be as popular as the wikipedia page. It needs to stay correct.
Last edited:
Maybe I am dense. But it sounds reasonable to me. Though adding to the entry sounds good.
- Status
