Talk:Earl Mindell

message: GA Criteria
1. It is well written. - Weak Pass
* Overall the article passes this criteria with no glaring MOS violations but there are some areas that could be improved.
* I would merge the Trivial detail into a relevant section of the article. There is no need for a one line section, especially on that should be actively avoided.
* I do like the Bibliography table but the particularly coding of it doesn't link the ISBN to Wikipedia's Booksource program. See WP:ISBN. This greatly aids the curious reader in being able to track down a particularly book of interest. Admittedly, I'm not most knowledgeable when it comes to tables and codes but I would strongly encourage the editors of this page to try and find a way to incorporate the ISBN links to the bibliography table. I will note that this is not a precursor for GA attainment, just an improvement suggestion.
* There are several cases of redundant "Wiki-links" like the multiple linkings to Multi-level marketing and Pacific Western University. These items only need to be wiki-linked on their first appearance in the article. I would also look at the "See Also" section which includes items that have already been linked in the article and is simply not needed in this section. 
2. It is factually accurate and verifiable - Weak Pass
* Overall the article passes this are because as the whole it is well referenced with reliable sources. However, there are some areas for improvement.
* I would be leery of "over tagging" in a few cases, both for aesthetic as well as practical reasons. For example, is 5 in line citations really needed for the 3 lines of text under Education. Judging from the rest of the article it looks like the citation style incorporated is to bunch them up at the end of the paragraph. In accordance to WP:MOS and WP:CITE standards that is acceptable. But in practice with sections like Education, it still looks a little like overkill. Even highly controversial claims need no more then 2 cites from reliable sources and some editorial discernment should be leverage to pair down that list to the sources that best attribute the pertinent claims. As a reader, there is some practical disadvantages to seeing a trail of cites at the end of the paragraph in that I don't immediately know exactly which claim is the controversial one that requires so many cites. Is it his North Dakota degree? The Master Herbalist diploma? The fact that Pacific Western University is unaccredited? An excess burden is placed on the reader to then fish through all the cites to try and figure out what the issue is. In seeing so many cites, there is a sense that "Something is up" here and that the reader needs to be more discerning about the verifiability of what they are reading. In some cases, especially of controversial figures, that is skepticism is welcomed and needed for NPOV standards. However, I would encourage you to pinpoint those cites to those controversial statements so that the reader doesn't have to search all over the place to find out exactly what they should skeptical about.
* In a slightly similar vein, there are "In wiki" references to "See above" in the case of the unaccredited Pacific Western University. In spirit, in wiki referencing should be avoided. In practice, its redundant since the reader most likely has already "seen above" and not only has the in-line cites to verify but also the wiki link article to Pacific Western which includes those details and more referencing. At its worse, the "see above" breaks up the flow of the prose in a unneeded manner. 
3. It is broad in its coverage. - Weak Needs Improvement
* A couple questions that popped into my mind while reader the article is "What lead Mindell to this field in the first place?" What motivation or interest in his early life might have set him on this path. The second question, and the area most needed to be expanded, is Mindell's reaction to the controversy and questioning of his claims and practice. Was any of his 45 books done in response to the CBC expose? There are some brief mentions of types of reaction-Not citing a discredit study, the trivia note about the apothecary in his garage. I think these items would be better suited in a summary paragraph titled to the effect of "reaction",
4. It follows the neutral point of view policy - Needs Improvement
* This article has the challenge of presenting an NPOV portrait of a subject that is neither "hostile nor sympathetic" as well as presenting due weight to the scientific aspect (and challenges) involved. In certain areas this articles excels. Example: In the lead 
:Mindell has previously promoted oral supplements of an "anti-aging" enzyme, superoxide dismutase (SOD). There is currently no evidence for the supposed benefits of SOD, and it is well known that the enzyme would not survive the digestive process if taken orally.
That is a very well done and NPOV presentation of Mindell claim and the scientific communities skepticism of the matter. In addition to the source citation, there is no pre-set conclusion being foisted upon the reader. The reader can decide for themselves, the weight and value they should assign to Mindell's claim. 
* However, there are some times that the desire to "dispel" myths cross the POV line with such buzz words like "In truth". Example: In the Controvery section 
:Mindell claims that eating foods that are high in DNA and RNA will help reverse the aging process. In truth, these nucleic acids are digested and never reach human somatic cells in such a form that would directly benefit the consumer.
The relative merit of the claim aside, the phrasing "In truth" is a directly hostile stance to Mindell's claim with the article being the bearer of "truth" to his falsehood. A much more NPOV approach would be to heed the examples elsewhere in the article by simply stating the lack of evidence for Mindell's claim instead of pitting it as a dynamic of "truth".
* I'm not the biggest fan of the inclusion of "Quackwatch" in the see also section. Coming at the end of the article it reads like a "Wikipedia Indictment" or summary of the article. It is obvious that some folks think Mindell is indeed a quack, but that type of linking should be done in the article with a source attributed to someone who thinks he is a quack. It's placement in the See Also section is almost weaselish.
5. It is stable - Pass
* The article is not in the current midst of any edit war or significant change in content.
6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic. - Needs Improvement
*Image:Dr earl mindell.jpg, Image:Mindellcbc.jpg needs detailed fair use rationales. See WP:IDP#Fair_use_rationale for more details.
In assessment, I think this article is close to attaining GA status and I want to applaud the editors for their work in getting this article up to this point. I think the areas of improvement are quiet scalable and I strongly encourage the editors to resubmit for GA status once these concerns have been addressed. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. AgneCheese/Wine 01:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review

message: I removed the freelifegojinews.com reference from the CBC Exposé section as it looks like linkspam to me. For a start it links to pages where you can buy Goji juice and it doesn't contain any new information that isn't available in the original citation (i.e. the Marketplace program). If there's a good reason to include it, please correct me, but surely we can get quotes from the program somewhere else (that isn't promoting Goji)? Famousdog 13:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freelifegojinews.com 

message: There is no reason to have a external link to a company site, especially one with it's own Wikipedia article that's already linked. See Wikipedia:El#Links_normally_to_be_avoided #5 & #14. --Ronz (talk) 03:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Your user page mentions that you are civil. However, I saw cursing and a WP:COI allegation. Please take those back. Badagnani (talk) 03:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're commenting on the things I've already removed, correct?  I removed it about 10 minutes before you made the above remark.  Sorry that I didn't apologize about them when I removed them. --Ronz (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

text: "I removed it about 10 minutes before you made the above remark." --Ronz (talk) 03:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Concerning the coi allegation

message: The following link is dead.  I'm unable to find any mention of the article outside of references to Earl Mindell, so I'm concerned that the reference might be in error.  Can anyone confirm it, find a copy somewhere else, or find another article to source the same material?
*The California Pharmacists Association (3 April 2007). California Pharmacists Take Top Honors. 
--Ronz (talk) 03:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Found it on another site. Changed link. Famousdog (talk) 13:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I've delinked the ref. --Ronz (talk) 22:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Help with ref please

message: I've outlined above what could go in the "Controversy" section.  I agree that we need a better name for the section per NPOV.  That said, these recent edits  are the reverse of what should be done beyond attempting to find a better name for the section. --Ronz (talk) 21:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad you like the new section name.  Keegan (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an improvement.  I hope we can change it again to something more descriptive once we get the section together. --Ronz (talk) 21:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: At about the 8 minute mark (actually before a number of the claims attributed to the video apparrently) the video stops. I suggest that we would need an accurate transcript for any claims about this possible scam in order to obey WP:BLP   Videos are not all that good - especially when they are truncated before anything interesting is said.  Collect (talk) 00:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The video did at one time verify the information. Remove the link, keep the reference. --Ronz (talk) 02:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  CBC essentially a deadlink 

message: Is 55 the number of titles, or does it count editions as well? I rounded it down to 50 given that I believe people have been insisting it is 55 total rather than something over 55. Did I miss something? --Ronz (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of books

message: Sites requiring registration
Shortcut:
    WP:ELREG
Outside of citations,[4] external links to websites that require registration or a paid subscription to view should be avoided because they are of limited use to most readers (according to Wikipedia guidelines).
This link  should be removed based on wiki rules.
Thank you,
~~Alannna~~
:Good to see you discussing your concerns.
:WP:EL doesn't apply because it is not an external link, but rather a reference, where WP:V and WP:RS apply instead. --Ronz (talk) 17:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  links Beware of Juices that Claim to Cure 

message: I would like to change the picture that is on Wikipedia.  How do I do that?
Thank you,
Alannna (talk)AlannnaAlannna (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 02:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: See MOS:IMAGES --Ronz (talk) 03:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Not to defend unaccredited schools but the University of Oxford is not acreddited in every state of the US.  Food for thought.   8675309 (talk) 07:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unaccredited School 

message: Hi Ronz - 
Hope all is well. I was hoping that you could help me in my editing of Talk:Earl Mindell.
The article appears to be well-attributed. However, it is not a well-balanced or objective portrayal of him. I've studied Wiki guidelines over and over, have referenced many other biographical Wiki entries and see that they, too, are balanced. Just a preliminary example is his date of birth, place of birth, that he's an author of about 60 books - these things are missing yet are quite pertinent and relevant. The aforementioned are constant entries in all of the biographical entries I've read.
My goal is to balance it and I need your help/advice doing it.
Would you like me to submit my edits and go from there? Let me know the best course of action.
Many thanks,
Fred (fpalmerinoFpalmerino (talk) 16:29, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to Earl Mindell 

message: The amount of COI editing with this article is a problem, and more cleanup is needed to avoid basic POV and BLP problems. I'm wondering if we may have lost important references since the 2008 GA reviews.
At a glance, he's notable for being a spokesperson for FreeLife's goji products. Some mention is due in the lede. --Ronz (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem here is that there is obvious edit warring going on between his supporters trying to whitewash his image, and his enemies trying to paint a libelous portrait of him. We need to include both perspectives from a balanced, neutral point of view. Negative claims, obviously written by someone who has a vendetta against him, as well as blatantly self-promotional content, both need to be seriously toned down. --Nilanda2019 (talk) 02:13, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  What I'm trying to do here is to balance out the edits between random editors from both extremes of the issue. While I personally doubt many of Mindell's claims as pseudoscientific nonsense, the criticisms currently listed in this article look like COI done by someone with really wants to paint a really negative image of him, which is a common problem with Wikipedia health and medicine biographies. Then on the other extreme, we have the self-promotional COI whitewashers too. --Nilanda2019 (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you know WP:FALSEBALANCE? Are you sure that what you call "libelous" or "one of the extremes" is not actually the position of the scientfic community? Are you competent enough in the subject of pseudoscience and/or medical science to decide that? --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:43, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Unfortunately, the edits you are making are identical to those of the "COI whitewashers". Please review the information I'd already left on your talk page, and consider making a declaration about any conflicts of interest you may have with this topic. --Ronz (talk) 15:15, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Article needs careful review

message: Information to be added or removed:
1. Please change the lead paragraph from: Earl Lawrence Mindell is a Canadian-American writer and nutritionist who is a strong advocate of nutrition as preventive medicine and homeopathy. to read as: Earl Lawrence Mindell (born January 20, 1940) is a Canadian-American writer and nutritionist. He is best-known as the author of the book, New Vitamin Bible. 
2. Please change the second paragraph of the 'Early life and education' section from: Mindell received a Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy from North Dakota State University in 1963. In 1995, he earned a Master Herbalist Diploma from Dominion Herbal College. Mindell earned his Ph.D. at Pacific Western University, an unaccredited institution. to read as: Mindell received a Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy from North Dakota State University in 1963. In 1995, he earned a Master Herbalist Diploma from Dominion Herbal College. Mindell earned his Ph.D. at Pacific Western University in Los Angeles, California. 
3. Please add a section on 'Career' with the following content:
Mindell is a registered pharmacist, herbalist, and a former professor of nutrition at Pacific Western University in Los Angeles (now California Miramar University). He is on the Board of Directors of the California College of Natural Medicine, and serves on the Dean's Professional Advisory Group, School of Pharmacy, Chapman University.  
Mindell is the author of the bestselling book The Vitamin Bible, in addition to 50 other titles written on nutrition, drugs, vitamins and herbal medicines.
4. Please move the section 'Selected bibliography' up after the proposed 'Career' section and add the following references.
Ref #1 - https://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=worldcat_org_all&q=earl+mindell
Ref #2 - http://www.shareguide.com/Mindell.html
5. Please add a section on 'Reception'
As per Publisher Weekly, Mindell in his book Healing With Hemp CBD Oil, ‘relates the oft-maligned plant's history and health benefits. He shines a bright light on hemp's potential benefits, and his spirited defense of the plant may even stir up the reader's ire against those who would suppress it.’ Andrea Kay of MBR Reviewer's Bookwatch says that the book offers an eye-opening examination of hemp's legal status in the United States. She also says that it guides the non-specialist general reader in using this all-natural substance as a safe and side effect-free remedy. ‘Healing with Hemp CBD Oil makes an ideal and unreservedly recommended addition to personal, professional, community, and academic library Alternative Health & Medicine collections and supplemental studies lists,’ opines Midwest Book Review. 
6. Please change the name of the section 'Relations with the scientific community' to 'Criticism' and edit this section from: 
Mindell's theories on health and nutrition have been met with criticism in the scientific community. Mindell has previously promoted oral supplements of an "anti-aging" enzyme, superoxide dismutase (SOD). There is no evidence for the supposed benefits of SOD, and it is known that the enzyme would not survive the digestive process if taken orally.
Mindell made several claims about the health benefits of wolfberry juice, commercially known as "Himalayan Goji Juice", while associated with a direct-selling company called FreeLife International Inc. Mindell's claims regarding goji juice include supposed benefits for cancer patients based on evidence of cancer cell inhibition in vitro (i.e. in a dish). In an interview with Wendy Mesley on the CBC consumer television program Marketplace (aired January 24, 2007), H. Leon Bradlow, coauthor of a study that Mindell cites as support for this anti-cancer claim, says that his research does not, in fact, prove that goji has any anti-cancer properties, and that there is no scientific evidence such effects occur in vivo (i.e., when consumed). In addition, Bradlow's study was carried out at Hackensack University Medical Center, not Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center as Mindell had claimed. When faced with this information, Mindell stated in the same interview that he will stop citing the study. Mesley then went on to confront Mindell about the validity of his Ph.D from Pacific Western University, and Mindell asserted that his degree is "accredited in every state in the Union."GojiJuiceNewsCenter.com. Retrieved on 2007-03-21. .
His book Earl Mindell's Vitamin Bible was criticized by James A. Lowell in 1986, in a review reprinted by Quackwatch. The book contains over 400 errors.Jacobsen-Wells, JoAnn. (1989). "Speakers Urge Quackdown Against Health Fraud in Utah". Deseret News. Retrieved November 22, 2018. Professor of pharmacognosy Varro Eugene Tyler noted that Earl Mindell's Herb Bible contained many inaccurate statements and unsupported claims.Tyler, Varro Eugene. (1992). "Book Review Earl Mindell's Herb Bible (1992)". Quackwatch. Retrieved November 22, 2018. Mindell has also drawn criticism for his claim that habitual lying by children can be cured by large doses of B vitamins.Butler, Kurt. (1999). Lying for Fun and Profit: The Truth about the Media: Exposes the Corrupt Symbiosis Between Media Giants and the Health Fraud Industries. Health Wise Productions. p. 81.  Nutritionist Kurt Butler has described Mindell as a "pill-peddling charlatan, and that his ideas are totally unsupportable". Mindell has asserted that vitamin A is safe to take in dosages up to 100,000 IU per day, but this claim is considered by some other mainstream scientists as controversial. He has also drawn criticism for stating that many mainstream medical doctors are uninformed about vitamins.Barrett, Stephen; Herbert, Victor. (1994). The Vitamin Pushers: How the "Health Food" Industry is Selling America a Bill of Goods. Prometheus Books. pp. 357-358.  to read as: 
Mindell had claimed the health benefits of wolfberry juice (aka Himalayan Goji Juice), while being associated with a direct-selling company called FreeLife International Inc. His claims included supposed benefits for cancer patients based on evidence of cancer cell inhibition in vitro (i.e. in a dish), but this has been criticized by scientist H. Leon Bradlow.
In 1986, Mindell’s book The Vitamin Bible was criticized by James A. Lowell, as having various errors. Professor of pharmacognosy Varro Eugene Tyler asserted that Earl Mindell's Herb Bible contained many inaccurate statements and unsupported claims, while Nutritionist Kurt Butler has described Mindell's claim's as "totally unsupportable".  
7. Please add a section on 'Recognition' with the following content
In 2002, Mindell received The President’s Award by The National Nutritional Foods Association (NNFA). In 2007, he was inducted into the California Pharmacy Hall of Fame by the California Pharmacists Association. He received the Book Publicists Award of Southern California in 2013, and the Ernie Weckbaugh Memorial Lifetime Achievement Award in 2014.
8. Please change the 'External links' as:
Explanation of the issue:
For your easy reference and review, I have given point-wise explanation for each proposed change:
1. Adding his birth date and removing words expressing his opinion. Also, adding a citation
2. Removing incorrect links and adding citations for verification
3. Restoring a section which was there earlier but removed, looks like an attempt to malign the page
4. Re-arranging the layout of the page as bibliography is a part of his career
5. Adding a section on the positive reviews on his book to neutralize the page as per WP:NPOV
6. Proposing a right name for the section and removing content which is merely an opinion of others which no solid reference. Again, looks like an attempt to malign the page but am unsure so adjusting the neutrality
7. Adding content which was there earlier in a proper section
8. Proposing correction of the external link (official website)
All reference links and citations are added in the text for verification. Thank you.
TP495 (talk) 20:01, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: 1. The link you cite is not a reliable source and does not contain his date of birth nor does it say he is "best-known" for writing the vitamin book. This doesn't give me much confidence with spending time reviewing the rest if you can't get such a basic thing right. SmartSE (talk) 10:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate the disclosed edit request, but I see it as non-starter. Please break it up into individual requests, indicated BLP-quality references for each, demonstrate an understanding of FRINGE and BLP. Some indication of having reviewed the editing and discussions here would also help. --Ronz (talk) 16:44, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some proposed changes