Talk:History of LSD

message: I removed the subsection titled "Bicycle day" as it was highly tangential. There is already an appropriate reference to "Bicycle Day" in the section titled "Discovery and history". TR166ER (talk) 15:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tom Roberts should be cited as he coined this phrase Turkeyphant 02:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bicycle Day 

message: More erudition. Perhaps "coined" 98.144.238.191 (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "inventing a word"? Rhetorically, Is it patented, copyrighted? 

message: Lack of erudition is appalling. 98.144.238.191 (talk) 14:13, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not "promoting" an idea. It is "promulgating". 

message: Change from blotter paper to an image of bottle of Rx Delysid. This is  "History" Of LSD reddit. 98.144.238.191 (talk) 14:28, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening image 

message: I contributed a paragraph on the use in Czechoslovakia, but it got deleted completely. I believe it is very relevant because it was one of the few countries that produced it's own LSD and the research done for military, medical and experimental purposes was quite extensive and is well documented, for which I provided 4 different sources from reliable media, and certainly more could be found in literature I don't currently have access to. This was argued by User:WikiLinuz who deleted the text to not in fact be reliable sources, but I disagree with that judgement. Furthermore, I also disagree with the judgement of it being WP:UNDUE as I think it's comparable in significance and extent to e.g. the mkultra research and my text had comparable volume and I consider the judgement of it being undue to be an instance of Americentrism. My paragraph was free of opinion claims, it only provided a summary of events. I would thus like it to return the text in some form. Please tell me in more detail how it should be modified so that it's more acceptable. 
Barvinek (talk) 10:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The MIT press source the only reliable source on your addition. I'm not against adding the material about Czechoslovakia, but it should be properly sourced. The MIT source is mainly about LSD's application in psychedelic therapy (which I have no problem with), but significant amount of the content you added is about military usage (which the MIT source doesn't talk about). So you should add reliable sources particularly regarding LSD experimentation in the military (and by the communists). --WikiLinuz (talk) 11:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: So, do I understand it correctly, if I provide sources that you would consider more reliable, you would find the text itself acceptable? Does the language of the source affect how reliable is it considered for English wikipedia? Or do you also see other issues with it? Barvinek (talk) 12:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. As long as the source itself is reliable, it can still be used. Though English sources are preferred if available. See WP:NONENG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 13:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Why exactly is a documentary movie that literally shows the people doing the research themselves recollecting the events and literally showing footage from the military research with an official military commentary considered "not reliable source"? Barvinek (talk) 15:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're talking about ceskatelevize, it's really hard to WP:VERIFY since it's behind a paywall. There's no policy against including video sources (including paywalled sources), but if the subject really is well-covered, you shouldn't have trouble finding text sources (like books, etc.) covering this. --WikiLinuz (talk) 16:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: As a matter of fact, the movie is NOT behind paywall. https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/porady/10463665003-lsd-made-in-cssr/ ČT is a public TV, not a commercial one. This book gives a detailed account of the experiments outside military: https://www.knihydobrovsky.cz/e-kniha/lsd-vyzkum-a-klinicka-praxe-za-zeleznou-oponou-227839035 Would that be considered a reliable source? Barvinek (talk) 18:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, we can then use the documentary then (since there's lack of coverage in English sources). Yes, the book seems like a RS. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research in Czechoslovakia