Talk:Colic flexures

Irrelevant or scope-inappropriate claims and citations, with WP:SELFCITE and WP:MEDBIAS concerns

Claims and citations of concern, both added in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Colic_flexures&diff=prev&oldid=1350166232 by User:Sławomir Woźniak Anatomist Surgeon:

• "flexures[...] can interfere with the course of a colonoscopy", which cites Woźniak, Pawlus et al, 2023 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs12565-022-00681-8)
  • This is a standard claim, but cited article only mentions it once, in passing and does not explore it in depth, and is instead concerned with preliminary exploration of novel diagnostic methods. Even introductory articles and this interview transcript provide more relevant information, and that's just after a cursory search.
• "Some authors consider it necessary to clarify and recognize the terminology", which cites Woźniak, Quondamatteo et al, 2023 (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fjoa.13800)
  • Cited article is irrelevant to this article on colic flexures - it is mainly concerned with the terminology of rectal flexures vs. bends. It does not propose changes to the terminology of colic flexures (with one exception below), and mistakenly claims there is no established terminology for other colonic flexures (e.g. descending-sigmoid flexure, which is attested in an 1850 case report (content warning: graphic death), and an 1987 journal article; note that it is not usually termed a colic flexure, and Wozniak et al do not challenge this).
  • The cited article is otherwise a proposal for new terminology, much of which has yet to become widely accepted (e.g. use of "intracolic flexures").

Wikipedia's audience is the general public. Regardless of the author's possible professional accomplishments, this content is better suited to a specialized forum, not Wikipedia. Informaldehyde (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2026 (UTC)