Talk:Allopathic medicine

message: I have been skimming through all the historical discussion here trying to see what the problem really is. It looks to me like the camp that wants to claim that allopathic is always a pejorative (in the face of contrary evidence from many well mainstream websites) has an orchestrated agenda aimed at replacing the current usage of the term 'allopathic' with the term 'evidence based'. It would save an awful lot of bother here if you would just own up. (profound apologies if I'm misjudging anyone). I briefly thought of nominating the article for deletion but actually there's a lot of interesting material gathered here which would be a shame to waste. I now think the real problem with this article begins with its title. An article entitled 'allopathic medicine' ought logically to be based upon the philosophy of those practicing 'allopathic medicine' but as far as I can see a significant proportion of those supposedly practising it reject any concept of it, so that's a recipe for endless conflict. Would a better title be something like 'A history of the usage of the term allopathic medicine'? just a thought...86.148.15.235 (talk) 23:37, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Am I getting this right now? 

message: I am a long term user of the terms 'allopathy', 'allopathic' - even allopath for an allopathic practitioner. However, in my view an article entitled 'allopathic medicine' ought logically to be based upon the philosophy of those practicing 'allopathic medicine'. As far as I can see here though a significant proportion of those supposedly practicing it reject any concept of it (& that's fair enough because the term & any definition did not originate within their school of thought). So with the current title we have a recipe for unresolvable unnecessary conflict (within a subject that will remain nevertheless not without controversy). Would a better title be something like the above 'Uses & meanings of the term allopathy'? Or if not then perhaps some variation such as 'A history of the usage of the term allopathic medicine'? 31.51.220.92 (talk) 18:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No – there is no reason to rename the article, and it would be contrary to WP:PRECISION to rename it. The situation is not unresolvable at all; it simply needs to reflect the definition used by the preponderance of reliable sources, as Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires.  I'll be addressing this separately. Mathglot (talk) 21:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looking back at this now, although IP's proposal for a title wouldn't wash, their idea about how to restructure the article is a reasonable one, and has something in common with a Broad concept article, discussed in more detail below (especially, here and here).  Also, I no longer agree with my previous comment about using one definition (now struck), based on the preponderance of sources, because a BCA wouldn't have just one definition, it would have several, thus resolving the conflict in warring about a single definition for this article. Mathglot (talk) 07:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to rename article - 'Uses & meanings of the term allopathy' 

message: Should the article Allopathic medicine get converted to a DAB page, BCA (Broad concept article) or a Set-index article, remain As is, or something else?
* BCA   DAB – at this point, I'm leaning to DAB page with two blue links per entry, as proposed above by WaId, but am open to persuasion otherwise. Mathglot (talk) 06:41, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: *, I only see the example at the top - modern medicine and conventional medicine are both redirects into medicine. II | (t - c) 07:04, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: *:Oops, you're right; will have to look into that. Anyway, agree with you, that they shouldn't be redirects. Mathglot (talk) 07:46, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey 

message: * Why can't this be a redirect to a section within the medicine article? If the Heroic medicine linkage is an issue, just use the Template:Redirect template on that section. ie. "Allopathic medicine" redirects here. For the humoral imbalance therapeutic method, see Heroic medicine.Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)[ᴛ] 01:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: In  !vote, Widefox opted for BCA, adding:
.
But I don't agree; I think they are distinct.  I see the BCA as different in an important way for what is there now, and also some of the arguments that have happened on Talk before, as well as the whip-sawing of the lead back-and-forth (see the History over several years). The difference to me, is this: if it is a BCA, then there's no need to argue over which one has an overall "majority" of the reliable sources, because majority/minority wouldn't be relevant anymore. 
To give an example: I find it completely pointless to determine if more reliable sources contrast allopathy with ayurvedic medicine or with homeopathy in order to establish the "correct" lead and defining sentence.  Once we've agreed (if we agree) that it's a BCA, now we can approach it completely differently, and the RSes in each camp simply belong to the sections devoted to them.  See #BCA prop 1 below for an attempt to draft something that would demonstrate this distinction with the "As is" version. 
Putting it another way, given the article's history, nobody can really agree on what the "As is" version really is. (We've already lost one years-long editor of this article, who has removed it from their watchlist.) The BCA idea is an attempt to resolve this intractable disagreement about what allopathy "really" means, and put an end to the fighting about a single definition, that will probably never work, in favor of multiple definitions. The lead paragraph should merely indicate this state of affairs, without choosing one definition over the other. Mathglot (talk) 07:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: My point being a !vote for an article, as opposed to a dab or a specific type of list (SIA). WP:BCA . Once an article is decided, editors can follow normal editing without the distraction of dabs and SIAs. Widefox; talk 07:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with  on the plan described above. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 22:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the BCA option the same as 'As is'? 

message: A comparison between Allopathy and traditional medical systems should be there. Pinkpantherol (talk) 14:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And from which reliable source are we supposed to get it? Also, this article is not about the thing some people call AM, it is about the term AM which is used by those people. Such comparisons are off-topic. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elaborated introduction 

message: some Alternative medicines are best and safer than Allopathy in most of the cases,Allopathy is usefull in emergency care.,in long run it is bad for health. Health insure (talk) 08:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello , please read WP:FORUM. Make sure you use those pages only to propose specific changes to the article. And make sure you provide sources. --McSly (talk) 17:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allopathy is usefull in emergency.but curing disease Alternative medicines having more calliber.