Category talk:Whole medical systems

Skepticism Category‑class

	This category is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Alternative medicine Category‑class

	This category is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Why this?[edit]

This category has been created in accordance with the NCCAM classifications of alternative medicine.Hgilbert (talk) 14:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative medicine is categorized according to the NCCAM categories (see Template:Alternative medicine); "whole medical systems" should thus replace "alternative medical systems". The two categories should probably be merged under the term "whole medical systems"; note that this is a specific sub-category of alternative medicine. Hgilbert (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either way, we would be best to delete the page so we can move the existing page more easily, otherwise it can't as easily- if we tried to move it it would just say the other page exists and not let us. So I'll clarify that as a reasoning we agree on (deciding whhether to move it we'd have to do via consennsus, but we might as well remove an obstacle in the way). So I'll renew the reasoning and you can add a contest tag again if you feel the need. Sticky Parkin 17:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The entire reason why you guys failed to replace "alternative medical systems" seems rather obvious to me. NCCAM made a simple name change. Therefore, "alternative medical systems" should simply have been moved to the new name. Furthermore, the design of your template is radically different from the old accepted format. Ergo, you guys should delete your templates and category. And, do it the correct way. You tried to complete with the accepted setup, when all you had to do was change the name. -- John Gohde (talk) 16:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate name and newer/smaller cat[edit]

The NCCAM may believe these are whole medical systems but a lot of people practice them as Complementary therapies, i.e. they use mainstream medicine too, and they are not recognised as complete systems on which people should rely wholly by the mainstream and consensus. I presume that's why the category was named 'alternative medical systems' (I wasn't there at the time) as they are 'alternative' in terms of the mainstream, mostly not endorsed by normal doctors etc, so they are alternative medical systems and that's what most people would call them. On wikipedia we use a neutral point of view and put views which are not the mainstream views in perspective. Sticky Parkin 23:09, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alternative medical systems per common names, neutrality, etc.Verbal chat 10:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alternative medical systems - at the least a bit more NPOV. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss above[edit]

The above discussion looks like it was never taken very far. To continue it:

The NCCAM is a significant body in the field; I would be slow to disregard its weight. It is certainly a mainstream group, contra the above. Above all, there are good reasons for certain medical approaches to be called "whole medical systems" rather than alternative medicine; see the NCCAM website for explanations of why this is. It is certainly not NPOV to ignore the most significant mainstream professional voice in a field. hgilbert (talk) 20:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]