Talk:Chemophobia

message: Hello! I made a few edits. Added a source for education reducing chemophobia, and added another bit of Francl's writing (I will probably relocate this Francl piece in a later edit). I intend on making several more changes, including but not limited to the addition of as many recent, peer-edited sources as I have access to. Clearly there has been some extensive argument over what should and should not be in this article. If anybody takes issue with my edits, I would be happy to discuss them. Elpardack (talk) 19:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information addition, restructuring, etc. 

message: I will be progressively submitting my edits to the article starting now, starting from the top down. Elpardack (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Final notes

message: The Wikipedia page for "Chemical"
states that:
"A chemical substance (also called a pure substance) is defined as "any material with a definite chemical composition", and includes common substances such as water.
So, saying that chemophobia is an irrational aversion to chemicals is the same as saying that it is an aversion to any material with a definite chemical composition, including water.
It would be better to state that the aversion is to laboratory and industrial chemicals, a does not refer to naturally occurring chemicals.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.98.174.236 (talk) 13:54, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the first paragraph makes it quite clear that the issue relates to "synthetic chemicals".  Can you suggest an alternate wording that would make it clearer for you?  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:00, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

text: This article doesn't seem to be about a psychological affliction, but more a (not necessarily debilitating) psychological phenomenon similar to disgust or homophobia. The article is quite well-referenced, including references from IUPAC, Journal of Chemical Education and Nature Chemistry, none of which are fringe journals and all of which mention the concept by name, so I'm not quite sure what's objectionable here. 0x0077BE (talk · contrib) 21:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Spurious complaint which has no connection to what the article actually says. Alexbrn (talk) 06:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

text: There is no problem, the complaint is indeed spurious.  Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:21, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: This article is presented as psychology but it's not such. Or else it's fringe in that area. It's certainly not a psychological diagnosis that's reflected in the general literature at all but rather it's a pseudoscientific diagnosis presented by a very tiny group of people who have an agenda -- the very definition of the worst of fringe. SageRad (talk) 12:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This article doesn't seem to be about a psychological affliction, but more a (not necessarily debilitating) psychological phenomenon similar to disgust or homophobia. The article is quite well-referenced, including references from IUPAC, Journal of Chemical Education and Nature Chemistry, none of which are fringe journals and all of which mention the concept by name, so I'm not quite sure what's objectionable here. 0x0077BE (talk · contrib) 21:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Spurious complaint which has no connection to what the article actually says. Alexbrn (talk) 06:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

text: There is no problem, the complaint is indeed spurious.  Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:21, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fringe theory // POV issues 

message: — Assignment last updated by Bega24 (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23