text:
Ciskei

Ciskei (, meaning on this side of [the river] Kei), officially the Republic of Ciskei (iRiphabliki yeCiskei), was a Bantustan for the Xhosa people, located in the southeast of South Africa. It covered an area of 7700 km2, almost entirely surrounded by what was then the Cape Province, and possessed a small coastline along the shore of the Indian Ocean.

Under South Africa's policy of apartheid, land was set aside for black peoples in self-governing territories. Ciskei was designated as one of two homelands, or "Bantustans", for Xhosa-speaking people.

Xhosa people were forcibly resettled in the Ciskei and Transkei, the other Xhosa homeland.

In contrast to the Transkei, which was largely contiguous and deeply rural, and governed by hereditary chiefs, the area that became the Ciskei had initially been made up of a patchwork of "reserves", interspersed with pockets of white-owned farms. In Ciskei, there were elected headmen and a relatively educated working-class populace, but there was a tendency of the region's black residents—who often worked in East London, Queenstown, and King Williams Town—to oppose traditional methods of control. These differences have been posited as the reason for two separate homelands for the Xhosa people being developed, as well as the later nominal independence of Ciskei from South Africa, than Transkei.

After its creation, large numbers of blacks, in particular, "non-productive Bantus"—women with dependent children, the elderly, and the infirm—were expelled by the apartheid government from designated white areas in the Cape Province to Ciskei, and it was also treated as a reservoir of cheap black labour. The diaspora of the Ciskei Xhosa was due to the settler colonialism and internal wars between the Xhosa.

Ciskei had a succession of capitals during its existence. Originally, Zwelitsha served as the capital, with the view that Alice would become the long-term national capital. However, it was Bisho (now spelled Bhisho) that became the capital until Ciskei's reintegration into South Africa.

History
By the time Sir John Cradock was appointed governor of the Cape Colony in 1811, the Zuurveld region had lapsed into disorder, and many white farmers had begun abandoning their farms. Early during 1812, on the instructions of the governor, Lieutenant-Colonel John Graham forced 20,000 Xhosa to cross the Fish River. Subsequently, 27 military posts were erected across this border, which resulted in the establishment of the garrison towns of Grahamstown and Cradock.

At the end of the 19th century, the area known as British Kaffraria between the Fish and Kei rivers had been set aside for the "Bantu", and was known as the Ciskei from then on. Europeans gave the name Ciskei to the area to distinguish it from the Transkei, the area north of the Kei.

After the Union of South Africa formed in 1910, the "Bantu" rights of occupation remained unclear, and differed from colony to colony within South Africa. The Native Lands Act of 1913 demarcated the reserves in the Union, and made it illegal to sell or lease these lands to Europeans (except in the Cape Colony). General Hertzog pursued his segregation policy, and subsequently passed the Native Trust and Land Act in 1936. This act effectively abolished the right of the Cape "Bantu" to buy land outside of the existing reserves.

The boundaries of the Ciskei region changed as land was added and excised. A notable excision was the removal of the Glen Grey and Herschel Districts, and their allocation to the newly independent Transkei, with the populations of the districts moving into the rest of Ciskei to retain their South African citizenship (which was subsequently lost when Ciskei became independent).

By the 1970s, the South African government decided on the final boundaries of Ciskei, as a consolidated area, through the amalgamation of existing reserves allocated to Ciskei, and the purchase of intervening white-owned land. This amalgamation reduced the total length of Ciskei's borders, making them easier for the South African government to police, as well being an attempt to create a more viable area for the homeland.

Independence
In 1961, Ciskei became a separate administrative region, and in 1972, was declared self-governing under the rule of Chief Justice Mabandla, who was then followed by Lennox Sebe. Mabandla was a Fengu, a group that had allied itself with the British in the frontier wars, and were better educated as a result of historically embracing colonial education. Further embittered by the policies of "retribalisation" by the apartheid authorities, the Rharhabe became resentful, and asserted their position, which culminated in the election of Sebe —although Sebe later abandoned his anti-Fengu rhetoric.

In 1978, it became a single-party state under the rule of Sebe. In 1981, following an independence referendum in 1980, it became the fourth homeland to be declared independent by the South African government, and its residents lost their South African citizenship. However, there were no border controls between South Africa and Ciskei.

Black people who were found to be living without permits in white areas or farms in South Africa, often for generations, were forcibly relocated to Ciskei by apartheid authorities, generally from "black spots" in the neighbouring "white corridor", and moved into squalid resettlement camps. A 1983 study by Rhodes University found that 40% of the children in one camp suffered from wasting caused by malnutrition, and 10% suffered from kwashiorkor. In another camp at Thornhill, 50% of the children died before the age of 5. Typhoid epidemics also broke out in the resettlement camps, which were often isolated, located far from urban areas, and lacked health facilities, sanitation, and schools. The forced relocations of blacks to the Ciskei resulted in high population densities in the homeland, a situation that persists to the present day.

On several occasions, the Ciskei government imposed collective punishment on communities that opposed its rule, and people fled the Bantustan back into South Africa proper, because of the harassment and denial of government services to dissenters.

In common with other Bantustans, its independence was not recognised by the international community. Sebe once claimed that the State of Israel had granted official recognition to Ciskei, but the Israeli Foreign Ministry denied this.

Ciskei–Transkei hostilities and Operation Katzen
In 1986 and 1987, Transkei, a larger, wealthier, and more populous entity, undertook a series of military raids on Ciskei, and attempted to seize control of Ciskei. One of these raids was an attack on leader Lennox Sebe's compound, with the apparent goal of taking him hostage, in order to force a merger of the two Bantustans. Transkei had previously granted sanctuary to Lennox Sebe's estranged brother, Charles, the former head of Ciskei's security forces, who had been imprisoned in Ciskei on charges of sedition, in addition to previously kidnapping Lennox Sebe's son. The South African government ostensibly intervened to warn the Transkei government off. However, during a later meeting of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, it was revealed that the plan to amalgamate the Transkei and Ciskei into a proposed Xhosaland, as well as the freeing of Charles Sebe from prison, had been carried out by South African security forces linked to the Civil Cooperation Bureau, in order to consolidate an anti-ANC front in the Eastern Cape region, as part of the abortive Operation Katzen.

Coup d'état
In 1990, Brigadier Oupa Gqozo deposed Sebe and ruled as a dictator—despite an initial promise of a swift return to civilian rule. During 1991 and 1992, many of the legal foundations of apartheid in South Africa were removed, undermining the rationale for the homelands' continued existence. The African National Congress pressed strongly for them to be reincorporated into South Africa. This was opposed by Gqozo and the other homeland leaders.

Bisho massacre
On 7 September 1992, the Ciskei Defence Force fired into a crowd (led by Ronnie Kasrils, Cyril Ramaphosa, and Chris Hani) of ANC members, and demanded the removal of Gqozo. 28 people were killed, and hundreds injured in the massacre outside the sports stadium in Bisho, the small capital of Ciskei.

Annexation
Gqozo refused to participate in the negotiations to agree to a post-apartheid constitution for South Africa, and initially threatened to boycott the first non-racial elections. This became unsustainable, and in March 1994, Ciskei government workers went on strike for fear of losing their job security and pensions in the post-apartheid era. The police then mutinied, prompting Gqozo to resign on 22 March. The Transitional Executive Council (TEC) appointed two administrators, who took control of the homeland to ensure security until the elections could be held the following month. The TEC also blocked the South African government from deploying the paramilitary Internal Stability Unit (ISU) of the South African Police force, as the unit was suspected of fomenting violence in other parts of the country after the Ciskei military had threatened to open fire on the ISU if it entered the territory.

On 27 April 1994, Ciskei and all of the other homelands were reincorporated into South Africa, after the first post-apartheid elections. Along with Transkei, Ciskei became part of the new Eastern Cape Province, with its capital becoming the capital of the new province, and the former territory of the Ciskei forming parts of the Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality, the Chris Hani District Municipality, and the Amathole District Municipality—as of 2016.

Districts in 1991
Districts of the province, and their populations at the 1991 census.
 * Alice: 43,452
 * Whittlesea: 50,199
 * Keiskammahoek: 32,740
 * Mdantsane: 105,117
 * Middledrift: 37,979
 * Peddie: 52,245
 * Zwelitsha: 142,779
 * Mpofu: 13,056

Law enforcement and defence

 * Founded in 1981, the Ciskei Defence Force consisted of two battalions and an air wing.
 * Ciskei Police
 * Ciskei Police - Law Enforcement Division
 * Ciskei Prisons Service
 * Ciskei Traffic Force

Notable persons

 * Ngconde Balfour – former South African politician, served as Minister of Correctional Services, and Minister of Sport.
 * Bantu Stephen Biko – former political activist, founder and the president of Black Consciousness Movement.
 * Joshua Oupa Gqozo – former Ciskeian President, and military head of state.
 * Thandatha Jongilizwe Mabandla – former Ciskeian President, and Ciskeian Chief Justice.
 * Membathisi Mphumzi Shepherd Mdladlana – former minister of labour, politician, and South African High Commissioner to Canada.
 * Raymond Mphakamisi Mhlaba – former South African politician and leader of the ANC and SACP and the first Premier of the Eastern Cape 1994–1997.
 * Wilton Zimasile Mkwayi – former anti-apartheid activist, and member of ANC.
 * Griffiths Mlungisi Mxenge – former political activist, and member of ANC.
 * Bulelani Ngcuka – former NPA director (1999–2004).
 * Looksmart Khulile Ngudle – former political activist, and member of ANC.
 * Lennox Leslie Wongama Sebe – former Ciskeian President and dictator.
 * Xhanti Charles Sebe – former Ciskeian acting president and murder victim.
 * Archibald 'Archie' Mncedisi Sibeko – former anti-apartheid activist, and member of ANC.
 * Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe – former political activist and the founder of PAC.
 * Moses Twebe – former anti-apartheid activist, and member of ANC.

Books

 * Mager, A.K. (1999) Gender and the Making of a South African Bantustan: A Social History of the Ciskei, 1945–1959, Heinemann.
 * Switzer, L. (1993) Power and Resistance in an African Society: The Ciskei Xhosa and the Making of South Africa, University of Wisconsin Press.

title: Ciskei


text:
Manuel de Falla

Manuel de Falla y Matheu (, 23 November 1876 – 14 November 1946) was a Spanish composer and pianist. Along with Isaac Albéniz, Francisco Tárrega, and Enrique Granados, he was one of Spain's most important musicians of the first half of the 20th century. He has a claim to being Spain's greatest composer of the 20th century, although the number of pieces he composed was relatively modest.

Biography
Falla was born Manuel María de los Dolores Falla y Matheu in Cádiz. He was the son of José María Falla, a Valencian, and María Jesús Matheu, from Catalonia.

In 1889 he continued his piano lessons with Alejandro Odero and learned the techniques of harmony and counterpoint from Enrique Broca. At age 15 he became interested in literature and journalism and founded the literary magazines El Burlón and El Cascabel.

Madrid
By 1900 he was living with his family in the capital, where he attended the Real Conservatorio de Música y Declamación. He studied piano with José Tragó, a colleague of Isaac Albéniz, and composition with Felip Pedrell. In 1897 he composed Melodía for cello and piano and dedicated it to Salvador Viniegra, who hosted evenings of chamber music that Falla attended. In 1899, by unanimous vote, he was awarded the first prize at the piano competition at his school of music. He premiered his first works: Romanza para violonchelo y piano, Nocturno para piano, Melodía para violonchelo y piano, Serenata andaluza para violín y piano, and Cuarteto en Sol y Mireya. That same year he started to use de with his first surname, making Manuel de Falla the name he became known as from that time on. When only the surname is used, however, the de is omitted.

In 1900 he composed his Canción para piano and various other vocal and piano pieces. He premiered his Serenata andaluza y Vals-Capricho para piano in the Ateneo de Madrid. Due to the precarious financial position of his family, he began to teach piano classes.

It was from Pedrell, during the Madrid period, that Falla became interested in the music of his native Andalusia, particularly Andalusian flamenco (specifically cante jondo), the influence of which can be strongly felt in many of his works. Among his early pieces are a number of zarzuelas like La Juana y la Petra and La casa de tócame Roque. On 12 April 1902 he premiered Los amores de la Inés in the Teatro Cómico de Madrid. The same year he met the composer Joaquín Turina and saw his Vals-Capricho y Serenata andaluza published by the Society of Authors.

The following year he composed and performed Allegro de concierto for the Madrid Royal Conservatory competition. Enrique Granados took first prize with his composition of the same title, but the Society of Authors published Falla's works Tus ojillos negros and Nocturno. Falla then began his collaboration with composer Amadeo Vives on the zarzuelas Prisionero de guerra, El cornetín de órdenes and La cruz de Malta (only fragments of these works survive).

His first important work was the one-act opera La vida breve (Life is Short, or The Brief Life, written in 1905, though revised before its premiere in 1913). With a libretto by Carlos Fernández Shaw, La vida breve won Falla first prize in the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando musical competition, with a prize of 2500 pesetas and a promise of a production at the Teatro Royal in Madrid—a pledge which unfortunately was not fulfilled In April 1905 he won the first prize in a piano competition sponsored by the firm of Ortiz and Cussó. On 15 May his work Allegro de concierto premiered at the Ateneo de Madrid and on 13 November the Real Academia presented him with his prize for La vida breve.

Paris
Falla moved to Paris in 1907, where he remained for seven years. There he met a number of composers who had an influence on his style, including Maurice Ravel, Claude Debussy and Paul Dukas, as well as Igor Stravinsky, Florent Schmitt, Isaac Albéniz and the impresario Sergei Diaghilev. In 1908 King Alfonso XIII awarded him a royal grant that enabled him to remain in Paris while he finished his Cuatro piezas españolas. In 1910 Falla met Stravinsky and in 1911–12 traveled to London, Brussels and Milan to give concerts and investigate possible venues for La vida breve, which he had composed shortly after his arrival in Paris in 1907 but which, despite the support of Dukas and Falla's own best efforts, was not finally performed until 1 April 1913 at the Municipal Casino in Nice, with the libretto translated into French by the dramatist Paul Milliet. A second production was given the following year at the Opéra-Comique, to acclaim from critics such as Pierre Lalo and André Coeuroy. He wrote Siete canciones populares españolas, which he finished in mid-1914. Shortly after, World War I began, forcing Falla to return to Madrid. While at no stage was he a prolific composer, it was then that he entered into his mature creative period.

Return to Madrid
In Madrid he composed several of his best-known pieces, including:
 * The nocturne for piano and orchestra Noches en los jardines de España (1916)
 * The ballet El amor brujo (1915) which includes the much excerpted and arranged Danza ritual del fuego
 * The ballet The Magistrate and the Miller's Wife (El corregidor y la molinera) which, after revision, became El sombrero de tres picos (1917) and was produced by Serge Diaghilev with set design and costumes by Pablo Picasso. It derives from The Three-Cornered Hat (1874), a novel written by Pedro Antonio de Alarcón.

Granada period
From 1921 to 1939 Manuel de Falla lived in Granada, where he organized the Concurso de Cante Jondo in 1922. In Granada he wrote the puppet opera El retablo de maese Pedro (Master Peter's Puppet Show, 1923) and a concerto for harpsichord and chamber ensemble (Harpsichord Concerto, 1926). The puppet opera marked the first time Falla included the harpsichord in his orchestra. Both of these works were written with Wanda Landowska in mind. In these works, the Spanish folk influence is somewhat less apparent than a kind of Stravinskian neoclassicism.

During the 1920s and 1930s, he frequently visited Barcelona and Catalonia and became associated with various Catalan artists, critics and intellectuals, such as Joan Lamote de Grignon, Oleguer Junyent, Frank Marshall, Rafael Moragas, Jaume Pahissa and Santiago Rusiñol. He showed great interest in the sound of the cobla and attended several concerts of the Cobla Barcelona. He also collaborated with various Catalan institutions, such as the Associació de Música Da Camera, the Banda Municipal de Barcelona or the Orquestra Pau Casals, with whom he premiered the Concerto for clave with Wanda Landowska. In 1925, after an honorary banquet held at the Hotel Majestic, Falla said: «I have to tell you, and I say it with all my soul, that, without the Catalans, I might not have been able to carry out my work, or to be who I am».

Also in Granada, Falla began work on the large-scale orchestral cantata Atlántida (Atlantis), based on the Catalan text L'Atlàntida by Jacint Verdaguer.

Argentina
Falla continued work on Atlántida after moving to Argentina in 1939, following Francisco Franco's victory in the Spanish Civil War. The orchestration of the piece remained incomplete at his death and was completed posthumously by Ernesto Halffter. He also premiered his Suite Homenajes in Buenos Aires in November 1939. In 1940, he was named a Knight of the Order of King Alfonso X of Castile. Franco's government offered him a large pension if he would return to Spain, but he refused.

Falla did spend some time teaching in exile. Among his notable pupils was composer Rosa García Ascot. His health began to decline and he moved to a house in the mountains where he was tended by his sister María del Carmen de Falla (1882–1971). He died of cardiac arrest on 14 November 1946 in Alta Gracia, in the Argentine province of Córdoba, 9 days before his 70th birthday. He had left in writing that he wanted to be buried in the Sierras de Córdoba in Argentina. The Spanish Embassy of Francisco Franco took charge of his possessions when the family decided to bring him back to Spain. In 1947 his remains were brought back to Spain and entombed in the Cádiz Cathedral. One of the lasting honors to his memory is the Manuel de Falla Chair of Music in the Faculty of Philosophy and Letters at Complutense University of Madrid. Manuel de Falla never married and had no children.

Honours

 * 1935: Associate of the Royal Academy of Science, Letters and Fine Arts of Belgium.
 * 1940: Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Alfonso X the Wise.
 * Member of the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando
 * Member of the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de Nuestra Señora de las Angustias.

Legacy
Falla's home in Granada was a villa overlooking the city which has been preserved as a biographical museum. In the 1970s a concert hall, the Auditorio Manuel de Falla, was built on an adjacent site. The hall opened with a concert of works by Falla. It has since become the home of the City of Granada Orchestra.

His image appeared on the Spanish 1970 100-pesetas banknote.

A station on Madrid Metro's Line 10 is named after him.

Recordings by Falla

 * Manuel de Falla 1876–1946 Grabaciones históricas; Centro de Documentación Musical de Andalucía.
 * Rollos de Pianola (Obras de Albéniz, Granados, Turina, Ocón, Chapí, Alonso y Otros) (Almaviva, DS - 0141)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Manuel de Falla


text:
Talk:Foreign accent syndrome

Former life
What if this is the proof of that we actually have several lifes, and that you are getting the accent of a former self? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.255.133.48 (talk) 15:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Oh my, there are nuts where else you go! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.171.36 (talk) 21:21, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Famous Sufferers?
Im not sure but i think Sting suffered from this condition when he was a singer in The Police, he's from Newcastle but often sang with a Jamaican-esque accent like "Roxanne, you don' have to turn on de red light" but other times he would sing with his native accent, like "Message in a Bottle" no

 * Former Spanish primer minister José María Aznar has the syndrome. Humorists had a crack with his sudden outbursts of Mexicanized Spanish when he was visiting Bush in Texas.  In a recent press conference in Italy he spoke Spanish in a strange Italianized form.  --Amador 23:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Foreign Accent Syndrome
Can't find any reference to it, but in a recent TV item an American sufferer spoke with an "English" accent which sounded like Dick Van Dyke in "Mary Poppins", i.e. it was a pretty poor attempt at an English accent. Presumably the quality of the "foreign" accent depends upon the skills of the sufferer. That is not to say it is deliberately faked - but certainly it is not a "genuine" foreign accent. Anjouli 17:36, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Surely it just sounds like one. It's an phonetic impairment (caused by brain damage) which makes the speaker sound foreign. Secretlondon 17:38, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

 * I beg to differ. The example I heard sounded exactly like an American trying to sound British. And I mean exactly. But perhaps that was an example of somebody doing it on purpose because of some psychological compulsion. There may well be two different illnesses here. One a compulsion to impersonate and the other an organic interference with the speech-process.Anjouli 18:09, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * I think the case you mention above is the same one quoted below (on the BBC report). I wouldn't say it was a Dick Van Dyke cockney at all. It has some British pronunciation but it's not pin-downable to a region or class. There is an accompanying video. The video suggests that doctors believe it is psychological in origin but the text of the report suggests that the speech patterns on the speaker become mangled with injury and that this is interpreted as a foreign sounding accent in the hearer. Mintguy

 * It is indeed. The 'accent' as opposed to speech impediment is all in the minds of the hearer.  Some people have supposedly picked up accents they've never heard before.  Morwen 17:40, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

A PubMed search for "Foreign accent syndrome" certainly points in the direction of this being physical, rather than psychological, in nature. -- Anon.

 * Presumably, one would think, the foreign accent would have to be one with which the patient already has a certain degree of familiarity. Nowadays, with global communication and media coverage having become everyday phenomena, most people have at least some exposure to a wide variety of accents--at a minimum, British, French, German, Russian, Indian, Mexican/Latin American and Chinese. If the syndrome is psychological, I wonder if knowledge of the language behind the accent plays any role. For example, I speak German almost fluently, and thanks to extensive practice in reducing my American accent (yes, we do have an accent) as well as exposure to German speech, I can imitate the German accent without the common excessive exaggeration. (No German I've ever met utters mangled consonants like "Ve haff Vays uff makink You tak.") It would also be interesting to find out whether the foreign accent syndrome extends to grammar--would I start saying things like "The most of us came" or "Since six years I am living here"? Brain damage can definitely affect linguistic ability in unpredictable ways. A Frenchwoman I know whose grandfather was American and had lived in Cherbourg for fifty years told me that when he suffered a stroke, he lost a lot of his French vocabulary and syntax, but it gradually returned. --Bamjd3d

This is the most recently reported case ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3235934.stm ) I think it was also reported on the front page of The Daily Telegraph. Mintguy 17:49, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I don't think this is really treated as a syndrome. From what I've learned on the topic, people sometimes develop speech problems as a result of brain injuries. Some of them happen to end up sounding like a foreign accent. That doesn't mean, though, that it is necessarily a syndrome; it's more of a coincidence. WoodenTaco 02:21, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

On the Discovery Channel, on a program called "Medical Incredible", it was said that there had been only 20 reported cases since 1919. --Guthrie
 * And they also said not all experts agree; that it could result from having heard an accent at some time in life and the brain ending up employing it. To me, it seemed like the brain, with trauma is like "Now how do I use speech again? This instance of talking to Lord Byrington Femmingwether *trying to make a stereotypical British name* seems familiar; this must be the correct way to speak!"  Kinda like some horribly crossed wires.

I have foreign accent syndrome. It developed out of my illness. I have a very rare condition called PANDAS SYNDROME IN ADULTS. Basically I got a streptococchal (strep) throat infection which created antibodies to kill off the strep throat but instead of dying they carried on to my brain and damaged the basal ganglia. This is the part of brain that sorts out the movement and speech. I have to disagree with any of the people who say it is made up, mine certainly was not. When I was first in hospital undiagnosed I had three phases. 1st a very slow speech, 2nd normal speech, 3rd very fast repetitive speech e.g I I I dont dont dont know know know. I was given Trihexyphenidyl. Within 4-5 weeks my very slow accent got quicker. It sounded like a South Wales chapel preacher. My fast accent got slower down to 2 repeats. I I dont dont know know. Then it all merged into one. It was English with "a" at the end of every word. e.g. Ia donta knowa. I went to a speech therapist and she said i had a half french and half italian accent. She helped me by removing the "a" from the end of every word, I could not say lettuce or surface I spoke them how they sounded.

For those unbelievers out there; FAS is actually a syndrome, not a fad designed to look cool. It just happens that in the case of Cindy Lou Romberg, her new accent sounds unusual, funny, and quirky. The former is a case of a physical and chemical change in the body; the latter is a case of sociology and social constructs. rock8591 08:32, 1 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock8591 (talk • contribs)

Newspaper plagiarises Wikipedia?
This July 3 "Evening Chronicle" article includes the paragraph about the Norwegian woman, word for word. And the article was last edited in April. Hmm. Sandstein 17:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Norwegian? Have borrowed some back! Martinevans123 (talk) 14:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Plagiarism?
Here is an artcile from the BBC's website from 2002 that would seem to have been at least partially plagiarised for the Wikipedia entry.

From the BBC page: 'To add insult to injury, some doctors dismissed the problem as more likely to be psychiatric in origin than physical.

Dr Jennfier Gurd, who led the research with phonetician Dr John Coleman, said: "The way we speak is an important part of our personality and influences the way people interact with us.

"It is understandably quite traumatic for patients to find that their accent has changed."

Dr Coleman told BBC News Online: "There is a good likelihood in time you are going to improve and become more like you used to be."'

Compared to the (later) Wikipedia entry: 'Usually, it is very traumatic for stroke patients to find that their accent has unexpectedly changed, usually adding insult to the previous, severe brain injury. Furthermore, many physicians have dismissed foreign accent syndrome, calling it psychological.'

'Dr. Jennifer Gurd and Dr. John Coleman, the latter a phonetician, have studied patients of this condition, and have found that the great majority are severely traumatized. However, Coleman believes that in time, patients may improve, regaining their former speaking abilities.'

 * That's not plagiarism, at least from a legal standpoint. The fact that it has been removed from the article saddens me, as it is hypercorrection. Paraphrasing another work is perfectly legal, as long as the work is not fictional (and thus the actual fictional situation and characters are under copyright). Anyways, since we Wikipedians cannot do original research, our only hope is to paraphrase other works. As long as a reference is given, there is nothing academically wrong with it, either. It might be discouraged in school, where the focus is getting the students to learn to write for themselves (and allows original research), but that doesn't make it dishonest in an encyclopedic setting. I'll leave it to another editor to decide whether or not to re-add the information.
 * -- trlkly 20:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

 * No, it's not plagiarism, it's using a WP:RS. Most of this material could go back in, with suitable reference to the source and/or quotes. There is currently still too little in the article in terms of research, explanation, analysis and possible treatments. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Another aspect of the disorder
I believe Cindy Lou Romberg was featured in a brief story on CNN recently. Another problem she had was what she called something like "speaking in a language no one can identify". She basically was attempting to speak English and believed the sounds she was making were separate words, but it was coming out as strings of nonsense syllables. I think she said this was involuntary, but I'm not sure. I don't know what this would be called medically or how to describe it in the article itself. Atherva (talk) 07:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

 * It is likely that she suffered Aphasia-like symptoms along with her FAS, possibly a production Aphasia like Broca's Aphasia.24.20.119.111 (talk) 21:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

A logical but controversial explanation
Since the condition shows up after a physical trauma, often a head injury, probably with a period of unconsciousness, an explanation would - if you can fit it in your belief system ... - be that such a person is a "walk in". What is that? See http://www.christian-reincarnation.com/WalkInE.htm for an explanation. Or how else would you explain that the person can in certain cases even speak words or sentences in a language he or she hasn’t learned (xenoglossy)? Any other "natural" explanation will be a lot more far fetched than this one! But you would have to admit that the human being has a soul that survives the death of the body. Signed: Jan Erik Sigdell (see the stated website) Nov. 19, 2008, UTC 13:55

 * There are two big problems as I see it here. One, the accent is not another accent, but to a listener resembles a foreign accent. For example, someone with FAS may sound British or Bostonian if there is no final r, and the listener assumes such. If you know or have a British/Boston accent, then you hear something else, such as a French accent.

 * Second is that anybody can speak words from another language. Xenoglossy can be attributed to speech perception as well. If I were to blurt out a string of syllables and sounds, invariably someone will hear words from some language. Sim-speak exemplifies this. It's all nonsense, but if you listen, you can hear words that aren't English. I am always hearing "Ohana" which is Hawaiian for family or Japanese for Flower because I know the word. Likewise, I also always hear "Tularu" which sounds vaguely Hawaiian as well. If I didn't know any Hawaiian, I wouldn't hear these as words. 24.20.119.111 (talk) 21:50, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

There was an incident involving an American television news reporter called Serene Branson - she was providing an on-the-spot report on the Grammys for her TV station - the moment she started to speak, she suddenly spouted a lot of incomprehensible gibberish.

Here is the video:

News Reporter Has A Stroke On Air

It's actually called an "Aura Migraine", what she suffered - apparently, it only affects women!

Arthurvasey (talk) 22:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Haha very funny
 After a stroke, her normal Geordie accent was transformed and has been variously described as resembling a Jamaican, as well as a French Canadian, Italian and a Slovak accent.

When you click on French Canadian, it brings you to Canada instead of where it properly belongs, Quebec. Good one fellas. (Vive le Quebec Libre!) KiNgFrOmHeLl (talk) 23:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys, I am surprised no one has mentioned the possibility of people faking it for publicity... I mean, the article is talking about these people becoming famous and skipping from talk show to talk show...

I mean, sure, it seems plausible that brain damage can alter how you speak, given that all we are is a complex set of connections in our brains, but some of this is ridiculous. I mean, seriously, I can't count the times the news has interviewed "psychics" "people who say the got a message from god" "people who claim to cure disease" I mean, there are tons of articles all over where people get exposed for faking that kind of stuff, and this has got to be even easier to fake... Done rambling now, but to put it succinctly, 1. This seems an easy disorder to fake/exaggerate 2. It seems some of these people are going out of their way to get as much publicity as possible from this... Connect the dots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.132.147 (talk) 21:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

 * It's possible, but unlikely. It's relatively easy to figure out people who are faking sometimes, just by the way they act. People who actually have speech disorders are consistent in their problems, and are usually frustrated by their inability to speak normally. Besides, you are comparing metaphysical with the physical. It's like comparing an Orange to an Elephant. The two are in no way equal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.119.111 (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

people encountered.
I met the nicest lady in her late 50s to mid 60s who has this condition. She was bit by a spider. The venom reached her brain and the only side effect is her distorted accent. Sounds German or Slovikian. I would have not believed it accept she had to get her husband to explain what happened and the condition she has. She's not been on any talk shows she just does organic gardening at home. If there's money to be made she's missing out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.46.196.38 (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Treatment
No mention of treatment in the article. www.ehow.com * states: "Individuals with Foreign Accent Syndrome usually respond well to treatment." —DIV (138.194.12.32 (talk) 03:38, 4 August 2010 (UTC)) * Note: website blocked on Wikipedia, please correct URL manually.

Patient with Foreign Accent Syndrome
I am a sufferer of FAS and would like to clarify a few points that people generally misinterpret when discussing or talking about this condition. FAS is a speech disorder in which others interpret the speech as a foreign accent when actually it is a dysfunction with the prosody, the rhythm, stress, and intonation of speech. The name of the condition is really a misnomer because people who suffer from this do not actually acquire a foreign accent. People with FAS do not wake up one day with the lingo and other generalized phrases of another region nor do they suddenly start writing in the variation of a particular language (i.e. American English vs. British English spellings). We may however miss words/letters, repeat words, add letters to words (such as ending words in a 's' sound when there isn't normally one there), have trouble finding the appropriate word that we are trying to use and the like. There are also many causes including differing forms of brain trauma. A few people, like me, have developed the 'accent' after severe, prolonged bouts of Sporadic Hemiplegic Migraines (see:Familial hemiplegic migraine).

The most important thing for people to remember is that this is not a true accent but a disorder in the way the words are formed, syllables are pronounced etc. so that the speech itself really cannot necessary be identified as an actual known accent. By this I mean that there may be times that a person with FAS 'sounds' British to the untrained ear but may actually pronounce various syllables in a manner that may match a combination of sounds associated with British, Australian and Irish accents. The quality of the speech may also change for many of us dependent on our fatigue levels, how we are trying to stress words, volume and other factors. It is a complicated and very frustrating condition to have not only because so few people are aware that it exists but also because of the loss of a very real part of our personalty.

Many people have implied that people with this condition are 'faking it' for the publicity or some other crazy reason. Please understand that this is not a condition you would want to have. The first year after my speech 'changed' I spent my time going to speech therapy and trying to get my own family to understand what I was saying. Many times during that period I would have to actually write out what I wanted to say or send emails across the room because my speech was so slurred and difficult to understand. Even two and a half years later I still have to repeat myself frequently, even with close friends and family, and have even had occasions where I have had to have a family member that is around me often explain to others what I am saying. Due to fears of foreigners that some Americans have, I have even been verbally accosted in public because people automatically think that I am foreign. I did not ask for this to happen and have enough struggles in my life without being further abused by people who choose to side on ignorance rather than education. But because of the trials I have had I am currently working on efforts to inform both the general public and medical community that this and other rare disorders do exist in the hope that others may receive better diagnosis and treatment for their conditions and not have to suffer the challenges that I have had to face. Juliekfrazier (talk) 06:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks for sharing your information and your experiences. I found it both helpful and informative.  Hope things are going well for you.  Thanks again!   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC))

 * Thanks for telling your story. I'm just a person who is curious about this extremely rare disorder. I notice that it has been almost 5 years since your posted this. Hope things have been getting better for you. Take care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjasmine (talk • contribs) 07:15, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Misleading article - suggested changes
I think that this article so far seems very misleading. I particularly dislike that specific accents are assigned to the sufferers of the syndrome in the list format at the end. Given that no one is really picking up another foreign accent (just having some changes in their accessible phonemes, prosody, etc, as Juliekfrazier mentioned above), it seems non-encyclopedic to give a list of what accent it "sounds like" they have, which is hugely subjective. I imagine people will be curious, but it might be worth while to either try to re-emphasize that these are not real accents or at least reword the sentences that make it seem like they are accents. Example:

 * Another incident involving migraine was recorded in September 2010, again with a British woman. After lying down for a while because of her migraine, 49-year-old Kay Russell, from Gloucestershire UK, woke up with a French accent.[22][23][24]

Could be re-worded as:

 * In September 2010, Kay Russell, a 49-year-old woman from Gloucestershire UK, lay down due to a migraine and woke up with/suffering from FAS. Her accent is generally described as sounding French, though it has also been categorized it as sounding Eastern European or Russian.[22][23][24]

(New details taken from the sources). Doing so may be a bit wordier, but it is certainly more accurate, and less likely to give a faulty impression to the reader of what FAS is actually like. 0x0077BE (talk) 00:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

 * I quite agree. Re-reporting the cases in this way is indeed self-contradictory for this article. But, in some cases we will be stuck with the way it was originally reported. The example you give would be ideal. Unfortunately, however, these stories are a great topic for tabloids, where such niceties are not needed. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

This article is becoming a list
This article is increasingly just becoming a list of people who have claimed in the popular media to have foreign accent syndrome. Most of the synopses are decidedly misleading or parroted from popular articles in direct contradiction to the more scientific parts of the article. I recommend that the list part of this article be purged. If someone wants to turn it into a little paragraph about how FAS is often reported in the media that seems like it could be done OK.0x0077BE (talk) 18:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean, but notability of cases is largely based on press reports and many of such reports are to be found in the popular press. I think the relevance of the list may be in its brevity, illustrating the rarity of this alleged condition. I have no problem with replacing tabloid sources with broadsheet ones, or with scientific journal material, if it exists. But, equally, I see no need for any "purge" until more scientifically-based material has been be added to the article. What do other editors think? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the list of incidents should be culled. An encyclopedic article should describe the disease, and perhaps a couple of notable cases. The fact that this is periodically covered in the news does not mean we should list every occasion CNN decides to air a story about this unusual condition.    Joel Why? (talk) 13:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I would have thought that CNN was a perfectly reliable source, especially compared to some of those which currently appear. I'd prefer to find better sources, if possible, before any "cull" is made. But how do we decide what is an "optimum" list size? If this condition is as rare as has been claimed, surely each reported case deserves to be noted, if not examined in some detail? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * CNN is a reliable source. I only meant that this condition is unusual and not particularly life threatening, so it makes a good human-interest story. Therefore, you'll see a good number of these cases covered by CNN, MSNBC, etc, but that doesn't mean they're particularly important. There appears to be about 1 case reported per year (i.e. 62 reported cases over the past 60 years), meaning it's rare, but there's absolutely no need to have 61 separate accounts for each individual. Drawing the line is always going to be an arbitrary matter, but I think narrowing this down to 2 or 3 examples in a single section makes sense.    Joel Why? (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh well, fair enough. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with @JoelWhy, though I'd probably prefer that the list be removed entirely and replaced with a paragraph, like, "Foreign accent syndrome has about x cases per year and often garners press attention. Many cases, such as those of John Doe[cite1], Jane Doe[cite2] and John Q Public[cite3] have been the result of strokes, while others[cite4][cite5][cite6] have been the result of a physical trauma." People can read the individual stories at the sources. If people think that the whole list is justifiably encyclopedic, I think it would be preferable to split the list into a second article, List of people reported to have Foreign Accent Syndrome or something of that nature. 0x0077BE (talk) 18:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * We'd need WP:RS even for such descriptive statements as ".. about x cases per year and often garners press attention." A list of reported cases has the benefit of being simply that (although ideally it should be based on a list published itself in a peer-reviewed journal paper, etc.) I'm not sure there are enough cases here to justify a whole new article. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it's better to imply a number of cases if we can't state it - that just seems like it's skirting the rules about sourcing statements. In any case, I think the wikipedia's editorial preference is, in general, to opt for prose over lists, and this article is wholly redundant. This article is mostly about FAS, not about the people who have it. Honestly, I think that if anything the limited nature of the list weighs in favor of a separate article, as it can be extensive. 0x0077BE (talk) 18:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry to see that you think "this article is wholly redundant." Martinevans123 (talk) 18:56, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I actually don't know what I meant by that and I don't remember writing it. Must have been distracted for a second and let my hands wander on the keyboard. I think what I might have meant is that most of the items in the list are wholly redundant as they are all variations on a theme. Person A has a stroke, wakes up sounding weird, people say that instead of their  accent, they now have a  accent. Person B fell down and messed up their jaw, now they speak like they are . I've been critical in general of the somewhat loose terms in which these events are described in general and I think that the fact that these case studies are now taking up a significant fraction of the article means that we need to either decide that such a list is worth including in Wikipedia - in which case it should have a separate list article - or such a list is NOT worth including, in which case it should be removed and replaced with a summary of its contents. This is the natural evolution of articles as they improve.0x0077BE (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, those are your own two preferred alternatives. Thanks for clarifying your position. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think it should be included here, and I don't think it should be turned into its own article. If there were 5 people in the history of modern medicine, maybe the list (even as its own article) makes sense. But, we've got dozens of cases. Again, extremely rare, but I just don't see how that warrants an encyclopedia article. I know there are tons of articles on Wikipedia that are equally undeserving (e.g. Pen Clicking) but no need to further clutter up the internet with trivia, IMHO. Joel Why? (talk) 19:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Strange, my Pen Clicking link isn't working, but there's an article (unfortunately) on this topic. What'd I do wrong?    Joel Why? (talk) 19:49, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles are case sensitive by default. I added a redirect from Pen Clicking to Pen clicking so now your original link works. 0x0077BE (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * How many dozens is that, exactly? And why do you consider this article to be "trivia"? Did someone mention a vote? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with a vote. Presumably the RfC should go out to WikiProject:Medicine and WikiProject_Neuroscience. 0x0077BE (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * A very good idea. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If this is an RfC we may want to narrow it to the minimum number of agreeable options. I think that overall the options we're considering are: leave it alone, prune it down, remove it entirely, summarize it or move it to its own article. Should we ask a more general "What should happen to it"? or should we just decide on 2-3 options and try and achieve consensus on those? I think "summarize" and "remove entirely" can be merged into one option. Do we have an existing consensus that something must be done, leaving us with the options of, "Prune down, restate in paragraph form or split to new article"? 0x0077BE (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not saying this article is trivia. I'm saying an article listing everyone who has experienced this disease would be trivial. Joel Why? (talk) 20:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * (And I'm saying it depends on how many there are.) And my preferred option - "improve sources of existing list and/or replace with a list from an academic paper". Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:07, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * We know how many there are. 62 since 1941.    Joel Why? (talk) 20:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, Mariën et al told us in 2009, apparently. But we don't know who they all were? Nor that the 14 included here are in any way considered (medically) to be the most notable (and at least 5 of these 14 seem to have occurred after that paper was written). Do you think 62 is too many for a list in a separate article (even if all their names were known)? Looks like a subscription to Cortex might come in useful... Martinevans123 (talk) 20:49, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not that I necessarily think 62 is too many for a list, it's that I think the individual names of each person is a trivial matter in the context of an encyclopedia. The disease is notable. Each individual who has contracted from the disease is not.    Joel Why? (talk) 13:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

RfC: What should be done with the list of Foreign Accent Syndrome cases?
The list of foreign accent syndrome cases in this article has grown over time - what should be done with it going forward? Options currently under consideration are listed below:
 * Keep as a list but improve (by pruning down and/or improving sources)
 * Remove the list and incorporate relevant content into the article in paragraph form.
 * Move the list into its own article. 0x0077BE (talk) 20:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Survey

 * Remove list and summarize. As per my arguments in the previous section, I am in favor of removing the list entirely and incorporating any relevant material from the lists in the main body of the article in paragraph form. 0x0077BE (talk) 20:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Remove list and summarize. The different list items all seem filled with trivia. I would take the few points that are of interest and incorporate them in the rest of the article. I would certainly leave out the names of the people involved. Most of them are not notable and if they are notable, it is because of other things. --Randykitty (talk) 20:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Remove list and summarise. If necessary, move list to: List of notable cases of foreign accent syndrome. However, if this is an established disease state then only particularly notable sufferers (including the first) should be noted in a society and culture / history section. There is certainly no need for a running tally. LT910001 (talk) 12:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Remove list and summarize A couple of notable examples may be included, but no call for a list here, and I contend there's no need for a separate page with said list, either.    Joel Why? (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Improve sourcing of existing list - ensure all sources are WP:RS and exclude items if not; attempt to agree more rigorous criteria for inclusion (cf List of unusual deaths); in the longer term - replace with a list pre-compiled by an academic journal paper, if such exists. (If a separate list article is deemed necessary, see such as List of people with synesthesia, etc., but note these are all also deemed to be notable persons in their own right). Martinevans123 (talk) 14:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep list but make sure sourcing is adequate Given the limited number of cases, a list is reasonable here, but every entry in it should be well documented. Looie496 (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Remove list and summarise. The list does seem rather filled with trivia, much of it poorly sourced. Once you cut out the trivia, it doesn't look to me that there'd be enough left for a list, even if such a thing were worthwhile. Better to take the salient information and incorporate it in the article. Anaxial (talk) 08:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Threaded Discussion
I think that seeing some of the responses to the survey, I'd like to make a comment about the list sourcing. For those in favor of keeping the list but "improving the sources", what exactly does that mean? From what I can see every item in the list has several sources. Does improving the sources mean keeping it to case studies mentioned in academic literature? Does a CNN fluff piece about someone who talks with a different accent now count but a similar article in the Daily Mail or New York Post not count? It seems to me that the fact that these are real cases is not at issue, and the sourcing is adequate. My two biggest concerns is that the sources almost uniformly will try to identify what kind of accent the person is talking with, which is an exercise in pareidolia and does not belong in this article. I'm not even comfortable with including, "People say that it sounded like a accent", as this gives the false impression that foreign accent syndrome results in someone going from talking like Kevin Bacon to talking like Pierce Brosnan overnight (which is not how it works).

Given the emphasis on sources, it seems to me like those in favor of removal and those opposed are not quite on the same page about what the problem is. In my opinion, the problem has nothing to do with sourcing, but the fact that this article should not be used as a repository for all news articles about foreign accent syndrome. I am of the opinion that it is not that these cases have not been adequately documented, but that they are simply not notable, nor is it relevant to the subject of the article, which is about the syndrome itself, not about the people who have it. Even if we had medical case studies listing every one of these patients in detail (the best source I can imagine for something like this), I still don't think it would be relevant for this article. My question to the "keep" supporters is: why do you think the sourcing is the problem, and under what theory do you propose that this list is notable? 0x0077BE (talk) 17:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sourcing appears a bigger problem to me than whether a list is here at all. And I think accuracy of "accent likeness" is one main part of that sourcing problem. Ideally I'd like to see sources only from experts in the field, who had assessed the person in question at first hand - not second-hand tabloid appraisals of how a friend or neighbour may have described the circumstances and the accent. I don't have worries about "realness" only about accuracy. (btw, I don't think what the popular press try to do is "an exercise in pareidolia". I'm not sure what the name is for trying to describing mutated speech in terms of a foreign accent, but I don't think it's pareidolia. Or if it is, then we ought to add a link to FAS over there! Martinevans123 (talk) 17:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Pareidolia is seeing familiar patterns that do not exist in the data. As FAS as described does not result in a specific regional accent, hearing someone speak with slurred speech and your brain automatically fitting that to an "Irish accent" would be an example of pareidolia. It's a wide net. Given that. I think that the sourcing question is irrelevant to the question of what to do with the list. Clearly if you choose to keep the list it should be maintained. I don't think anyone's going to disagree with that. 0x0077BE (talk) 18:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have an WP:RS that supports your assertion that distinguishing other-national accents (even false ones) is pareidolia, I think you should add it to that article. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:48, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's worth finding a WP:RS on the idea that this always is the result of a speech pathology (and thus any similarity to a real accent being entirely coincidental) and never as any kind of psychological/neurological effect where someone is mimicking a specific accent. If that's the case, I don't think it matters if we can find a WP:RS saying that when interpreted as a specific regional accent it's pareidolia, as that's necessarily true from the premises. That said, it's likely that if we find a source for the one they'll mention the pareidolia. 0x0077BE (talk) 19:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * good luck! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

On another note, I created a preliminary version of this article without the list in my namespace, retaining most of the sources and grouping the list into a paragraph on "Media coverage", as that seems to be the primary notable attribute of the list items: User:0x0077BE/Foreign_accent_syndrome 0x0077BE (talk) 18:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That's very good of you. Are you adding in intermediate edits? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:48, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I figured I'd wait until we got consensus and then try and merge them. The bulk of it was removing the list and adding a new section, so that doesn't need intermediate editing. I've noticed that you've done some significant cleaning up, so I figure if we go ahead I'll merge them manually and copy-edit as I go rather than cut+paste wholesale. 0x0077BE (talk) 19:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * (= some minor tweaks and copy edits). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

OK, it's been about a week, I'm thinking that the consensus is going towards removal of the list. I'll touch up the version in my userspace and unless there's a big swell against merge it into the article in the next few days. 0x0077BE (talk) 19:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Nobody selected "Move the list into its own article." But I don't see any consensus against doing that. Does this warrant a second round of the survey? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I imagine that at this point it's a separate issue whether the list on its own is notable. I would guess based on the fact that no one is really in support of moving it to its own article that the survey would come out against, but you're welcome to do the survey. Personally I don't think there's enough encyclopedic content here that it deserves its own article. 0x0077BE (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The survey has 3 options: (1) keep the list, (2) remove the list and summarize, or (3) move list to its own article. Given that the majority of people just suggested removal, it certainly does not appear to indicate support for creating a new article.
 * "Keep" and "remove" are mutually exclusive. "Move to own article" and "remove" are not. "Options currently under consideration" is not the same instruction as "choose only one option." (...just sayin'). And what's the argument about "not enough encyclopedic content" exactly? - we have a list of 14 factual reports. We don't know how relatively reliable they are - although we might guess from their sources. We don't know if some are mis-diagnoses, as we have no expert commentary. We don't know how they compare with the "62 since 1941" reported by Mariën et al in 2009. But even though we don't yet know these things, we still have a collection of seemingly relevant factual cases. To just throw it away, before it can be evaluated in some way, or put into a proper diagnostic context, seems to me a little rash. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, but the fact that "remove from this article" was broken into two possibilities and no one chose the latter position is telling of how a second RfC will come out. The fact of the matter is that a list of cases with their case histories is not particularly notable. Say there are 62 cases since 1941, and let's assume for now that all the ones that were interesting enough to warrant press coverage have been covered in this article. If you look at the list, I'd say about half of them we won't be finding any reliable sources that these people actually had FAS, and the other half are not notable. The only remotely notable cases I see in the article are the early cases (which are in the article anyway) and George Michael (and his claim to FAS is, to say the least, dubious, and can be covered in the article about him anyway).
 * To address your last point, I'd say that just because it's factual content doesn't mean it belongs in Wikipedia. An unembellished account of everything I've done for the past month is factual content, but it does not belong on Wikipedia. Even if it turns out that the things I've done in the past month somehow lead to some major revolution in industry or something, that content shouldn't have been put on Wikipedia pre-emptively. And, of course, we're not throwing it away. It's in the revision history, and this discussion will either be on the talk page or the talk page archive, and anyone can mirror it in their userspace whenver they want. Future editors are free to comb through it for redeeming or notable qualities and attempt to create a cogent article out of it, but my guess is that it would be deleted for lack of notability. 0x0077BE (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * ... straw man, assumption, prediction and mis-attribution. (Just because it's George Michael doesn't mean it's any more notable). Martinevans123 (talk) 08:01, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * How about being more clear instead of just spouting out the names of fallacies? George Michael is notable on his own accord, which is the reason why he has his own article. As a result, him having a rare disease is also notable. Think about this, if I break my leg on the job, is it notable? How about if Barack Obama breaks his leg on the job? Things are more notable when they happen to notable people. 0x0077BE (talk) 14:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Apologies if my quick summarising is seen as just "spouting out". But a broken leg is a broken leg, as far as I'm concerned (unless it's on a horse, of course), regardless of what you may have done for the past month. I'd agree that notability, in the popular sense, does indeed rest to a large part on celebrity. But I was thinking more about notabiity from a diagnostic/ medical perspective. Medical journals don't generally take acoount of blue internal wiki links. (.. and if you think that a death is more or less unusual simply because it has happened to a famous person, you might like to debate that issue at Talk:List of unusual deaths. Excluding the possibility of putting the list of cases here into its own article, on the basis of this RfC, prevents what some might see as a reasonable compromise, simply because the options have been framed in a certain way, i.e. "because A beats B, just forget about C". Martinevans123 (talk) 14:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

One of the references is possibly a phishing site
One if the references: http://www.healthmango.com/healthgeneral/foreign-accent-syndrome-what-is-it-and-most-notable-cases/ is reported to be a dangerous site by Mozilla Firefox. 89.138.15.255 (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Have removed it, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Foreign accent syndrome. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://cjns.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue%2C17%2C23%3Bjournal%2C24%2C81%3Blinkingpublicationresults%2C1%3A300307%2C1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071111224834/http://www.cohpa.ucf.edu/news/story_comdisclinic.cfm to http://www.cohpa.ucf.edu/news/story_comdisclinic.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611020142/http://www.wmtw.com/r/27798974/detail.html to http://www.wmtw.com/r/27798974/detail.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100425000406/http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/breaking-news/migraine-left-woman-with-chinese-accent/story-e6frg12u-1225855831038 to http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/breaking-news/migraine-left-woman-with-chinese-accent/story-e6frg12u-1225855831038

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:33, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

60 Minutes Australia
'60 Minutes Australia' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLxhSu3UuU4) features the topic. Kdammers (talk) 03:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I have the disease
If anyone ever needs information from an actual sufferer of the disorder or how it effects general life and well being, or the social ramifications of having a non-standard dialect, feel free to ask me. Lifelong sufferer. Live in TN but instead of a Mid-Land Southern(Country) accent. I have a non-rhotic variety of a Southern accent with a few minor AAVE features, such as th-stopping. Strangest feature is I have the extinct coil-curl merger. This collides with how my realization of /aɪəɹ/ as [äːɻ], so that 'fire' has merged with the sound of 'far', as well as 'tire' with 'tar'; I cannot pronouce "first" or "nurse" it morphs to "farrst" and "narse" SouthernGentleman00 (talk) 05:44, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Foreign accent syndrome


text:
Terry Farrell (actress)

Terry Farrell (born November 19, 1963) is an American actress and fashion model. She is best known for her roles as Jadzia Dax in the television series Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and as Regina "Reggie" Kostas in the comedy series Becker.

Early life
In her junior year of high school, the almost six-foot-tall (183 cm) Farrell submitted her image to the Elite modeling agency in New York City. Shortly after, at the age of 16, she was invited to New York City and, within two days of arriving, had an exclusive contract with Mademoiselle. She went on to appear on the covers of the Italian and German editions of Vogue, and was also featured in numerous editorials for American Vogue.

Career
After 18 months of modeling, she studied acting while still modeling on the side. Her first major roles were in the short-lived 1984 television series Paper Dolls, playing a model, and in the feature film Back to School (in her film debut) with Rodney Dangerfield, playing love interest to Keith Gordon’s character. In 1986, Farrell appeared in an episode of The Twilight Zone.

In 1989, she began studying acting with Stella Adler and appeared in a number of guest-starring roles in series, including Quantum Leap and The Cosby Show. In 1992, she played Cat in a second pilot for a U.S. version of Red Dwarf, which was not picked up.

Soon after the Red Dwarf USA project folded, she was offered a lead role in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Farrell starred as Jadzia Dax, the space station's Starfleet science officer, a character from an alien species known as the Trill, who is host to a 300-year-old symbiont, and can draw upon the memories and knowledge of the symbiont's seven previous hosts. The series debuted in January 1993. When she left the show at the end of the sixth season, Paramount killed off Farrell's "host" character (though continuing the "symbiont" character in a new Dax host, played by Nicole DeBoer).

Farrell then co-starred on Paramount's television comedy series Becker. She played Regina "Reggie" Kostas, foil and love interest to Ted Danson's John Becker, for four years and 94 episodes, before her character was written out of the show. Farrell told the Tampa Bay Times that she was fired from the show just after the season-four cliffhanger finale aired. She told the paper that she was completely surprised by the firing.

Farrell also provided the voice of Six of One in the animated short film Tripping the Rift, which eventually became a Sci-Fi Channel TV series with other actors providing the voice of Six. First released independently on the Internet, Tripping the Rift originally featured Patricia Beckmann as the voice of Six and was replaced by Farrell's voice for an episode of the Sci-Fi Channel's short film series Exposure, in which Farrell was guest host. Farrell's version of Six was heard only once on television.

Farrell retired in 2002 after marrying actor Brian Baker. They divorced in 2015, and Farrell played a role in the web-released fan film Star Trek: Renegades. She is expected to appear in the same role in episodes of Renegades, which strips mention of Star Trek for legal purposes.

Personal life
Farrell retired from acting to concentrate on her family. She lived in Hershey, Pennsylvania, with her husband, former Sprint Corporation spokesman Brian Baker and their son, Max. She enjoys sewing and yoga. Farrell appeared with Baker at the Hershey Area Playhouse in Hershey, in a production of A.R. Gurney's Love Letters. Farrell and Baker have been divorced since December 2015.

In August 2015, she was reportedly in a relationship with Adam Nimoy and Farrell confirmed on Twitter that they were engaged. Farrell and Nimoy were married in San Francisco on March 26, 2018, Leonard Nimoy's 87th birthday.

Farrell and her Star Trek: Deep Space Nine co-star Nana Visitor were honored in 2001 when William Kwong Yu Yeung named two small Solar System bodies he had discovered after them – asteroid 26,734 (Terryfarrell) and asteroid 26,733 (Nanavisitor).

title: Terry Farrell (actress)


text:
Talk:Rolfing

Marketing
The lede makes the claim that "Rolfing is marketed with unproven claims of various health benefits." This implies that all marketing of Rolfing is based on unproven claims; which seems like an unreasonable implication. The citations are paywalled and cannot be easily verified (even with Wikipedia Library). I intend to remove this sentence unless someone can provide the parts of those citations that make about how it is marketed. Or at best, the word "sometimes" needs to be added to this sentence. Does anyone have access to the cited works? — Epastore (talk) 15:38, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It doesn't imply that (though it may be so). Also, if you have been editing here WP:LOGGEDOUT be aware it's bad behaviour which if continued will see you banned. Alexbrn (talk) 15:41, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

 * Also, please read WP:PAYWALL. The fact that you don't have access to the source is not a reason why the information should be removed. --McSly (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes it does; the word "is" does not give room for variance. Your answer is unexplained and therefore meaningless. I repeat my request that the relevant part of the citations be provided, or I will remove the sentence for being unsubstantiated weasel words. I question the substantiation because it is hard to believe that they reviewed all marketing of all Rolfers. In reference to paywalls; I am asking for validation; I did not simply remove the sentence, see? — Epastore (talk) 15:49, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I added this text and you can be assured it's fine. Alexbrn (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I am not so assured. Please provide the relevant text, This is a reasonable request, given that I have challenged the claim and your only response is "it doesn't.".
 * (Also, I missed your earlier comment about editing logged out. I do not know what you are referring to; all of my edits are under my username. If you believe someone is editing logged-out, it is not me.) — Epastore (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The lede is a summary of the whole article. It seems good as is; we already list the claims made for Rolfing and the lack of evidence for those claims. I am not your library (you could always visit one for sources). An IP from Riverside, CA was removing the "marketing" material from this lede, but since this is not you please disregard by comments about that. As far as I can see, there is no claim Rolfers make, that is backed by evidence. Perhaps we need to bring that out more? Alexbrn (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A valid point. My real issue is with the overall tone and bias of the article, which reflects a religiosity of science (the very unscientific doctrine that anything that is not proven to be true must therefore be presented as false). I do see the tone is improving gradually over time, so I'll bow out of this trivial dispute; though I still strongly disapprove of the bias implicit in the current wording. — Epastore (talk) 19:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with this. The last paragraph of the summary is in no way a balanced view and represents an attitude that in of itself betrays the spirit of scientific study.
 * At the very least, another paragraph needs to be added citing the growing research showing myofascial and neuromuscular therapy to be beneficial and therapeutic when performed correctly. 73.243.37.110 (talk) 01:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Agree
I agree that rolfing is psuedoscience but is it not basically massage therapy of which there is 'some' evidence for? 2A00:23C6:1E82:8601:84EC:A89A:8C4B:B8AC (talk) 10:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

 * Massage is "the manipulation of the body's soft tissues," while Rolfing is specifically the manipulation of fascia, which surrounds all kinds of tissue. While the two may look similar in practice, there is no basis to evaluate the efficacy of Rolfing based on evidence about massage. — Epastore (talk) 17:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Reverts
Hob Gadling vandalised my factual edits on this page and personally smeared me, stating that I had a "pro-quackery POV"

Unless biased, why would he/she delete the factual information I included that Ida Rolf had a PhD? JRBC1 (talk) 13:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Content dispute is _NOT_ vandalism. Please read WP:VANDAL carefully. Falsely accusing people you don't agree with of vandalism will get you nowhere.--McSly (talk) 13:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

 * You still have no consensus for your edits. The probelm is not the users who revert you. --Hob Gadling (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There are numerous watchers of this page who edit with a heavy bias of scientism, holding on to the dogma that because science has described things, it has therefore somehow explained them. That's just the nature of Wikipedia; which has a scientism-dominated culture. Try making one edit at a time (eg, the PhD after Ida Rolf's name) and see what arguments they come up with to revert it. If you do several edits, they'll revert the whole thing with a bogus or insulting explanation (because hurling insults appears to be a part of scientism), regardless of how factual some of your edits may be. Good luck! — Epastore (talk) 19:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The horror! People who do not share your peculiar worldview are allowed to edit Wikipedia!
 * Actually, it's in the rules. Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia. See WP:FRINGE. --Hob Gadling (talk)
 * That's my point: scientism is embedded in the "rules" of Wikipedia (which technically has no firm rules). The followers of scientism (which is indeed mainstream) seem to have an issue with the fact that people who do not share their particular worldview are allowed to edit Wikipedia; and thus there are rules such as WP:FRINGE to enforce that worldview. It is entirely possible to be objective, impartial, and encyclopedic while explaining more than just the scientist worldview. Yet the "rules" do not allow that. And the scientists who revert any edit they don't like often comment with belligerent, insulting, dismissive, and fallacious opinions while applying their reverts. This illogical and rude attitude does not seem to do an encyclopedia justice. — Epastore (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * IRL adepts of scientism and the rest have equal rights. But this is not "real life". It is an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia like Britannica and Larousse, meaning heavily based upon mainstream science. Those are not crowdsourced, but all three share the same norms and values.
 * According to the medical orthodoxy, rolfing is quackery. You cannot change that inside Wikipedia before it changes inside the medical orthodoxy. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am aware of that; and am not prepared to take on the entire mainstream orthodoxy. Though I do believe that the scientists could act with more grace when editing this page, as dismissive, fallacious language doesn't serve any useful purpose.
 * And, in that science is the pursuit of knowledge, I also think that scientists could consider being less extremist (frankly: religious) in their rejections of other worldviews, and instead simply characterize them as having no scientific validity. That can be said without emotion, as emotional statements do not belong in an encyclopedia. — Epastore (talk) 20:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know about "emotion", but quackery is a kind of fraud so there is a moral aspect to it. That is found reflected in the sources. Bon courage (talk) 20:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia editors do not need to enforce moral standards onto other editors (or do you mean ethical standards?). Just because an editor makes an edit that may put Rolfing in some sort of favorable light does not make that editor guilty of fraud. The OP is asking why an edit noting that a person has a PhD was removed. That does not seem like an attempt to defraud anyone (just perhaps an unclear understanding of Wikipedia norms about credentials). — Epastore (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * "Wikipedia editors do not need to enforce moral standards onto other editors" ← what or earth are you on about? We reflect sources and if they characterize things in ways which you find "emotional" that's not a problem Wikipedia can fix. You are making silly personal attacks and it is beginning to become disruptive. If you have any actual useful proposals for improving the articles then make them; continuing to harp on scientists being extremists, is not helpful. Bon courage (talk) 20:32, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I am just asking editors to be civil instead of rude. Expressing a scientific worldview doesn't require overt, rude hostility to anyone not expressing it. (I am not talking about you, @Bon courage, as you have been delightfully civil in this thread.)
 * You're right though; this horse isn't worth beating anymore. This'll be my last reply on this. Thanks again and cheers. — Epastore (talk) 20:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * There are numerous watchers of this page who edit with a heavy bias of scientism sounds as if editors are your problem. Now, suddenly, when the rules are pointed out to you, the rules were your problem from the start. Whatever your problem is, it does not belong here. Problems with editors go to the drama boards, problems with rules go to the Talk pages of the rules. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What rule points at me? I am not the OP. Though I have indeed encountered editors being hostile, dismissive, threatening, and fallacious in their responses to my edits on this page. I have only encountered it on this page, so note it here, in response to the OP who also noted it. And the Talk archives for this page contain many similar posts; about the responses of editors to this page. You suggest a drama board for addressing this behavior? I am unfamiliar with that approach. — Epastore (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I said "pointed out to you", not "pointed at you".
 * All Talk pages of pseudosciences are full of complaints about "biased editors". See WP:YWAB. --Hob Gadling (talk) 20:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

 * Hob didn't remove the PhD, I did. we dont do honourifics like that on wikipedia. - Roxy the dog 20:17, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * See also MOS:CREDENTIAL. --Hob Gadling (talk) 21:06, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Please allow deletions of references which go to blank pages
I am neutral on this subject but really surprised that whoever keeps edit-warring back is obviously not. There is good science around Rolfing for cerebral palsy, fibromyalgia and back pain. I posted these (2014, 2015) sources but they were all deleted in favor of references that are over 20 years old and some which go to blank pages. This article currently states: "there is no good evidence Rolfing is effective for the treatment of any health condition" and references "page not found". Furthermore it says "...has been characterized as quackery" and then references two articles, neither of which mention the word quackery. Also the reference for this phrase: "The principles of Rolfing contradict established medical knowledge" is literally a book that was published in 1959. Cleajames13 (talk) 07:05, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

 * Don't push your luck. You could get indeffed at any moment. tgeorgescu (talk) 07:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * But no comment on the substance of the question as to why not add updated science? Cleajames13 (talk) 07:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * See WP:PSCI. tgeorgescu (talk) 07:22, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

 * WP:MEDRS sources are required for biomedical information. Contrary to what the OP asserts, the current content is WP:VERIFIED and the sources are good; none were published in 1959. For advice on dealing with web pages that are not forund, see WP:404. Bon courage (talk) 07:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

 * @Cleajames13, can you please cite those sources here? I would like to see why @Bon courage thinks they are not reliable sources. Also, I agree with @Bon courage in that I don't even see the number 1959 on the page anywhere; which source are you referencing as outdated? Additionally, the 404 you are getting is from the link to the original, which is no longer available. That's why the first link in the reference is to the web archive. This is an appropriate reference.
 * However, in reviewing that cited source ("Review of the Australian Government Rebate on Natural Therapies for Private Health Insurance"), it does not really seem to support what the Wikipedia article claims. While the Wikipedia article says "there is no good evidence Rolfing is effective for the treatment of any health condition," that cited source basically says that in a review of alternative therapies, the Australian government did not receive submissions of any sufficiently-rigorous studies in support of Rolfing. This is not the same thing as what the article claims. — Epastore (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * "the Australian government did not receive submissions" ← This is wrong. The reviewers performed a systematic literature review according to certain criteria and found:This is explained in lay terms in the cited WP:SBM source (with discussion of selection methods). Bon courage (talk) 03:16, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You are right. I had trouble accessing that document yesterday, and misinterpreted what I read. I had better luck today, and agree with your assessment: it's a valid representation of the cited document. My apologies for the incorrect assertion.
 * And I still have questions for the OP, above. — Epastore (talk) 20:19, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, response as requested:1.) the outdated resource I'm referring to is this one, under the "quackery" comment (published last in 1959): Clow B (2001). Negotiating Disease: Power and Cancer Care,  1900–1950 . McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 63. ISBN 978-0773522107. Before we explore medical reactions to therapeutic innovations in this era, we must stop to consider the meaning of 'alternative medicine' in this context. Often scholars use the term to denote systems of healing that are philosophically as well as therapeutically distinct from regular medicine: homeopathy, reflexology, rolfing, macrobiotics, and spiritual healing, to name a few, embody interpretations of health, illness, and healing that are not only different from, but also at odds with conventional medical opinion.
 * 2.) the other better recent studies (this was just a 10 minute search)  are these ones

(for exact notation go back to the version I changed): FIRST Structural Integration as an Adjunct to Outpatient Rehabilitation for Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Pilot Clinical Trial.
 * Eric E. Jacobson, Alec L. Meleger, Paolo Bonato, Peter M. Wayne, Helene M. Langevin Ted J. Kaptchuk, and Roger B. Davis
 * A randomized a clinical trial conducted at Harvard Medical School and Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital compared the Ten Series of Rolf® Structural Integration (SI) as an addition to the current standard of outpatient rehabilitation (OR) to OR alone for chronic low back pain (n=46). Median reductions in pain intensity (visual analog scale, 0-100 mm), were −26 mm in SI+OR compared to 0 mm in OR alone, but were not significantly different between groups (p=0.075, Wilcoxon rank sum). However, median reductions in back pain related disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, 0-24 points) of −2 points in SI+OR compared to 0 in OR alone was significantly different
 * SECONDMyofascial structural integration therapy on gross motor function and gait of young children with spastic cerebral palsy
 * Rolfer® Karen Price collaborated with Heidi Feldman, Alexis Hansen and others on three studies of Structural Integration for children with spastic cerebral palsy (CP) at the Department of Pediatrics, Stanford School of Medicine in 2009-2015. Price provided all SI treatments in each study.
 * THIRD - Clinical trials of Rolfing for fibromyalgia conducted by Paula Stal and summaried by Eric Jacobson.
 * "Fibromyalgia syndrome treated with structural integration Rolfing®"[1] / conclusion was: Each of the three treatment regimens was effective with statistically significant reductions in pre treatment levels of pain intensity, anxiety, depression, and quality of life both immediately post treatment and at 3 month followup. Rolfing® and acupuncture are useful as adjunctive therapies for fibromyalgia patients.
 * There are tons more:
 * "Fibromyalgia syndrome treated with structural integration Rolfing®"[1] / conclusion was: Each of the three treatment regimens was effective with statistically significant reductions in pre treatment levels of pain intensity, anxiety, depression, and quality of life both immediately post treatment and at 3 month followup. Rolfing® and acupuncture are useful as adjunctive therapies for fibromyalgia patients.
 * There are tons more:
 * There are tons more:

1. Stal P, MJ Teixeria. (2014). Fibromyalgia syndrome treated with the structural integration Rolfingr method. Rev Dor Sao Paul0, 15(4), 248-52.
 * 2. Stal P., Kosomi JK, Faelli CYP, Pai HJ, Teixeira MJ, Marchiori PE (2015). Effects of structural integration Rolfing method and acupuncutre on fibromyaligia. Rev Dor Sao Paul0, 16(2), 96-101.
 * 1. Hansen A. B., K. S. Price, H. M. Feldman (2012). Myofascial structural integration: a promising complementary therapy for young children with spastic cerebral palsy. Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine, 17(2), 131-35.
 * 2. Hansen A., Price KS, Feldman HM (2010). Myofascial treatment for children with cerebral palsy: a pilot study of a novel therapy. Pediatric Academic Society Annual Meeting. Vancouver, BC, Canada: May 2010
 * 3. Hansen A., Price KS, Loi EC, Buysse CA, Jaramillo TM, Pico EL, Feldman HM. (2014). Gait changes following myofascial structural integration (Rolfing) observed in 2 children with cerebral palsy. Journal of Evidence Based Complmentary & Alternative Medicine, 19(4), 297-300.
 * 4. Loi ED B. C., Price KS, Jaramillo TM, Pico EL, Hansen AB, Feldman HM. (2015). Myofascial structural integration therapy on gross motor function and gait of young children with spastic cerebral palsy: a randomized controlled trial. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 3(74), 1-10.
 * 5. Loi E., Buysse CA, Hansen AB, Price KS, Jaramillo TM, Feldman HM (2013). Gross motor function improves in young children with spastic cerebral palsy after myofascial structural integration therapy. Society for Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics Annual Meeting September, 2013
 * 6. Findley N., Jaramillo TM, Loi EC, Buysse CA, Hansen AB, Price KS, Feldman HM (2015). Gross motor function improves in young children with spastic cerebral palsy after myofascial structural integration therapy. University of California,San Francisco, student symposium.
 * 7. Buysse C., Loi ED, Price KS, Jaramillo TM, Hansen AB, Pico EL, Feldman HM (2015). Gait improvement in children with cerebral palsy after myofascial structural integration therapy. Society for Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics Annual Meeting 2015.
 * Jacobson E, Meleger A, Bonato P, Wayne P, Langevin H, Kaptchuk T, Davis R. . Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2015:813418, 2015.

 * Again - it looks like research in the last 15 years has validated Rolfing technique to treat at least a few conditions. I came to Wikipedia to read about it after I saw it as an option approved to be paid by my relatively conservative insurance company. Was really surprised to see all this old stuff here as I've come to rely on Wikipedia for better (and certainly more current than 1959) information. 73.189.249.162 (talk) 18:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

 * See WP:PSCI and WP:MEDRS. MEDRS says you have to have at least systematic reviews indexed for MEDLINE in order to make medical claims inside Wikipedia. And WP:REDFLAG still applies. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Clow's book was published in 2001, not 1959. Bon courage (talk) 18:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Rolfing updated research
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36233746/

The information on this Rolfing Wikipedia page in outdated and needs to be updated. The Ida Rolf Institute has changed some of the original philosophies to keep with current research on fascia. 2605:A601:ACA2:6400:3093:314C:95A5:9F97 (talk) 22:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Have they got a time machine then? No action taken as no sources presented. Bon courage (talk) 00:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The source was in the message but it was at the top so you might have missed it. I did upon first reading. Here it is: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36233746/
 * There are many other studies that I would be happy to provide links to so they can be represented here on this page. Perhaps in a new section for the page called Current Research?
 * In looking at the WP:FRINGE/ALT, it seems like current research should be included. It is research that leads us to new understandings and much new research has been/is being done into this practice as well as the underlying presumptions that began this practice 50+ years ago when we knew far less than we do now. The article cited here is measuring AROM which fits into the definition provided for Alternative theoretical formulations as part of the scientific process. Thanks! Wileshadow (talk) 06:31, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * See WP:MEDRS for why this "research" is hopelessly inadequate for our purposes. Thanks. - Roxy the dog 07:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed, primary research in an WP:MDPI journal. Junk. Bon courage (talk) 08:02, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I looked at your reference pages but I fail to see where it states that these kinds of research are junk. Research into anything begins where it can and I think it bears informing people that this research is happening. I agree that the individual research projects themselves have not yet risen to a level of changing the top tier of clinical guidelines but I think we might all be able to agree that that kind of thing could be rather fraught and a very long-term goal to achieve for a load of reasons. I do not think that it is untoward or lending undue credence to inform people that there are research projects on this subject. Is that not what Wiki pages are for in the end, to inform the public of a balanced view on a subject? Wileshadow (talk) 09:47, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Nope, WP:RULES are WP:RULES. Obey our rules or you're out. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Who is the "our" you are referring to? The general public that Wiki is supposed to be informing? Wileshadow (talk) 09:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. We are protecting them from being misinformed by stuff added by people who do not understand how science works and are unaware that they do not understand it. See WP:CIR. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That is a primary study. Therefore, it fails WP:MEDRS. We will wait until reliable secondary sources collect several such studies and find that the results are consistent. As any competent scientist would do. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok gotcha thank you for your responses. Wileshadow (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rolfing