Exactly. clear guidelines are in place for self published works. this article verily violates #2 (contentious - erm.. WP:MADEUP), #3 (unduly self-serving), and #7 (a section is primarily based un such material). #2 I am willing to concede that a self-published source full of amde-up hogwash is a fin source, as long as it is not presented as some sort of false authority. Anderson is obviously some sort of authority on Mucoid plaque, but he is not an authority on anatomy and physiology.
Hence why I feel tagging this article as very shoddy is appropriate, and I am confused why calls for clean-up and reassessment of a shoddy tit-for-tat POV-style have been met with alarm.