Talk:Qigong: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>D. Matt Innis
(Get this in shape)
imported>D. Matt Innis
Line 21: Line 21:
== Get this in shape ==
== Get this in shape ==


Hi Gary.  This is a good start for an article.  I think you could write something realy informative here, but it needs to take a more neutral stance concerning the concept of Qi and energy.  The article starts to describe Qi, but then moves on.  Is it real? Is it measurable?  Is it a metaphor?  Do chinese still believe this is real?  Is it a New Age therapy, etc., etc..  If we do this right, we can develop the other energy concepts accordingly.  What do you think? --[[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 19:36, 20 June 2007 (CDT)
Hi Gary.  This is a good start for an article.  I think you could write something really informative here, but it needs to take a more neutral stance concerning the concept of Qi and energy.  The article starts to describe Qi, but then moves on.  Is it real? Is it measurable?  Is it a metaphor?  Do chinese still believe this is real?  Is it a New Age therapy, etc., etc..  If we do this right, we can develop the other energy concepts accordingly.  What do you think? --[[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] [[User talk:D. Matt Innis|(Talk)]] 19:36, 20 June 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 19:36, 20 June 2007


Article Checklist for "Qigong"
Workgroup category or categories Healing Arts Workgroup [Categories OK]
Article status Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete
Underlinked article? Yes
Basic cleanup done? Yes
Checklist last edited by Matt Innis (Talk) 18:59, 20 June 2007 (CDT) Bruce M.Tindall

To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.





Removed link

I removed the following link, as instructed by the CZ Self-Promotion policy, because it links to a site with which the author is associated:

Bruce M.Tindall 12:55, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Get this in shape

Hi Gary. This is a good start for an article. I think you could write something really informative here, but it needs to take a more neutral stance concerning the concept of Qi and energy. The article starts to describe Qi, but then moves on. Is it real? Is it measurable? Is it a metaphor? Do chinese still believe this is real? Is it a New Age therapy, etc., etc.. If we do this right, we can develop the other energy concepts accordingly. What do you think? --Matt Innis (Talk) 19:36, 20 June 2007 (CDT)