::::HI Jess for the record  You said  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMotorola12&diff;=532096101&oldid;=532093064 I'd suggest taking the other advice you've received (from me and Andythegrump) seriously. Andy advised me I suggest you let the matter drop, before you are obliged to. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC) ,Many people dispute that in noticeboard and I produced 4 reelable sources of equal weight ( journals almost as important as the Lancet and others) which state something different things about  homeopathy. And again for the record, according to wikipedia policy, as long a different point of view is documented in a major  source ( Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine ) immediately is qualified for inclusion and reporting. If one wants to edit according to NPOV of course. Now I have to stop before I m obliged to like you and Andy said. Now I know how consensus is achieved  in controversial articles. Best regards