Template:Did you know nominations/Bodog F. Beck
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bodog F. Beck
[edit]- ... that physician Bodog F. Beck kept a beehive outside his office in New York for his "bee venom therapy"?
- Reviewed: Georgia Ann Robinson
Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Self-nominated at 10:22, 26 May 2017 (UTC).
Created newly enough, long enough. Within policy with regards to neutrality and citation in general (I added one {{cn}} though, please address). No copyvio detected. The fact in the hook does not appear in the article. Is it an oversight? QPQ remains to be done. HaEr48 (talk) 18:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- It's the third para of the career section "He used from 20 to 75 or 100 bee stings per patient, from bees he bred in his own hives outside his office specially for the purpose,". I added the new editions of his books to the publications section with refs. QPQ shortly. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Philafrenzy: ah. shouldn't the hook say "outside his office" instead of "outside his window"? Also, I check cassileth p.211, it doesn't mention Bodog Beck at all. Did you use the wrong citation? HaEr48 (talk) 02:02, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- I changed the hook. The Cassileth ref is only being used to support the comment that there are no studies proving bee venom therapy works. QPQ shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- What about this? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18807725 Andrew ranfurly (talk) 15:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- OK, but the use of the term "Western medicine" in the abstract is troubling. I prefer the book currently cited in the article. There is this as well https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25380812 If there is real doubt about the efficacy of BVT, those parts of the article can be removed as I only included them to make clear that the article is historical and not advocating the use of bee venom therapy today. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Philafrenzy: good to go with the updated hook. AGF because I can't access the subscription-only link. I agree with your assessment that secondary source like the book is preferable than analyzing the research papers directly. Ping me when your QPQ is done, and I'll give the tick. HaEr48 (talk) 06:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
- @HaEr48: QPQ done, thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:34, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
- It's the third para of the career section "He used from 20 to 75 or 100 bee stings per patient, from bees he bred in his own hives outside his office specially for the purpose,". I added the new editions of his books to the publications section with refs. QPQ shortly. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
