Jump to content

Talk:Raw foodism: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|archive_age=1|archive_units=year}}
{{Talk header}}
{{DYK talk|8 May|2004|entry=...that most people on a '''[[raw food diet]]''' won't eat anything heated to more than 46[[Celsius|°C]] (115[[Fahrenheit|°F]])?}}
{{DYK talk|8 May|2004|entry=...that most people on a '''[[raw food diet]]''' won't eat anything heated to more than 46[[Celsius|°C]] (115[[Fahrenheit|°F]])?}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
Line 26: Line 26:


Does anyone else find this statement reductive and dismissive? How about something like: "Many claims made by raw food proponents could be categorized as pseudoscientific." It just doesn't make sense to insinuate that every claim made by a raw food proponent is pseudoscientific. [[User:Wowisaac|Wowisaac]] ([[User talk:Wowisaac|talk]]) 06:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Does anyone else find this statement reductive and dismissive? How about something like: "Many claims made by raw food proponents could be categorized as pseudoscientific." It just doesn't make sense to insinuate that every claim made by a raw food proponent is pseudoscientific. [[User:Wowisaac|Wowisaac]] ([[User talk:Wowisaac|talk]]) 06:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

:@[[User:Wowisaac|Wowisaac]] This article is not written with a neutral point of view. [[Special:Contributions/143.55.89.242|143.55.89.242]] ([[User talk:143.55.89.242|talk]]) 18:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

== "[[:A Hovannessian]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
== "[[:A Hovannessian]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]

Latest revision as of 11:35, 10 July 2024

"Claims made by raw food proponents are pseudoscientific."

[edit]

Does anyone else find this statement reductive and dismissive? How about something like: "Many claims made by raw food proponents could be categorized as pseudoscientific." It just doesn't make sense to insinuate that every claim made by a raw food proponent is pseudoscientific. Wowisaac (talk) 06:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wowisaac This article is not written with a neutral point of view. 143.55.89.242 (talk) 18:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect A Hovannessian has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 11 § A Hovannessian until a consensus is reached. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 15:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Living foods diet has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 18 § Living foods diet until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]