Lyme disease was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Wikipedia's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed.
Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.
Within the past 10 years they have begun to revise the idea that Lymes disease is not transmissible through unprotected sex, with couples showing the same strains regularly.
lymedisease.org is not a credible source, and neither are the self identified ”LLMDs” commentating over the article.
The study cited was funded by Charles E. Holman Morgellons Disease Foundation which is part of a broader misinformation campaign surrounding Lyme, and the authors didn’t disclose that in their study. EVOSexybeast (talk) 04:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the page is very good and comprehensive. However, I looked for the term conspiracy on the page and didnt find it. I wonder if this is undue apprehension ? I think we should take misinformation head on.