Talk:Ann Patricia Bowling

Helping with article creation
Hi, I tried to help out a little by applying some formatting as well as standard wikitemplates for references. I think this article could really use some 3rd party references about the subject, like from journal articles or news items, to help establish Notability by WP:PROF. -Furicorn (talk) 20:03, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Oh thank you. I had given up as someone independent needs to upload it. But I had made my references to my work live yet again in my Sandbox with the Cite/auto/insert Wiki look ups snd inserts <> which should be live.Re notability, there are also several citations to my work in the national press, I will dig some out and see if they are also online. But are you able to use my Sandbox live references at the end as something went wrong and they lost their live status in the article upload - and do you mean you can move it to an article for me as an independent writer then please?
 * There have been TV and radio coverages of my research but finding any still existing live links now will take a while - e.g.(live and pre-recorded)reporting/interviews on my research on terminal care (1986), dancers’ injuries (1988), health service priorities (1992 & 1996), Quality of Life (1998) and cardiological services for older people (1998, 2007) include: BBC Radio 4 (Medicine Now), ITN News at Ten, BBC News Night, Channel 4 (Birthday of NHS), BBC Radio 4 (File on 4), BBC Breakfast TV, Channel 1 (Cable News), BBC Radio 4 (Today Programme), Radio 5 Live, Radio London News Network (LBC), Greater London Radio (GLR), London Talk Radio, BBC Somerset  and most BBC local station news in Britain.Press reports of my research include:  The Guardian and G2, The Independent, The Evening Standard, The Times, The Daily Express, The Daily Mail and The Daily Telegraph (front page news headlines on 14-02-2007) and local press (e.g. Hampstead and Highgate Express), Glasgow Herald.
 * So shall I find some of these links e.g. to the press?
 * It is generally a bad idea to write about yourself. You have an inherent conflict of interest and no-one but a true ascetic can write neutrally about themselves. Please keep that in mind when editing. Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 21:23, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Also please sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ ), so everybody knows who wrote what. Kleuske (talk) 21:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

here is an archived national press page 1 article about my work on ageing Here is a 3rd party national press citation about me on front page news Daily Telegraph 14 2 07  How many should I find? Thanks again, for your help A AnnQoLAge (talk) 21:35, 29 July 2018 (UT Thanks Ann AnnQoLAge (talk) 21:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC) Here is a 3rd party national press citation about me front page Daily Telegraph 14 2 07   https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/yourview/1542660/Are-the-elderly-less-deserving-of-the-best-medical-care.html Thanks Ann AnnQoLAge (talk) 21:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/yourview/1542660/Are-the-elderly-less-deserving-of-the-best-medical-care.html
 * Are the elderly less deserving of the best medical care? 12:01AM GMT 14 Feb 2007
 * Hi. New post go at the bottom of the thread, which helps the readability of the discussion. Also please don't reproduce content from other sites verbatim, since that's a copyright violation, which is a big deal for a free encyclopedia. Linking to the article suffices. Kleuske (talk) 21:44, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Apologies I am not so good at this, thank you for your help AAnnQoLAge (talk) 21:55, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize. You're a newbie, here. Kleuske (talk) 21:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * With regards to notability, I think the articles you provided are a good start, I'm going to read them. The wiki article also needs citations for the claims of awards or honors - an article about the award or a press release from the awarding institution would suffice. Journal articles from others in your field citing your work as foundational, critical, or notable would also be excellent.
 * Overall, the more third-party sources you can find, the better chance the article has of passing the criteria. Did you manage to read WP:PROF? I'm really hopeful reading it will give you a good sense of what sort of sources are being looked for. I'm sorry if the bar feels high, but as I am not a specialist in your field nor am from the UK, I hope you can understand if I or other editors have a hard time judging whether or not you are notable from your word alone.


 * I'm not sure I understand very well what you mean about the live-links disappearing, so I tried to take a look at User:AnnQoLAge/sandbox, and am I correct in thinking you were hoping to bring over the references you'd built into the sandbox article into this draft? Since they all appear to be your works, I wouldn't worry too much about them for now, because the main sources we need to focus on are third party sources. That list of publications would be useful for a "Published Works" section. I'll bring them over into that section, but I wouldn't cite them in the article. Please note, I'll be using a slightly different citation methodology that might seem a little confusing from the edit view, but the final output should look acceptable. -Furicorn (talk) 02:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I took a look at the Telegraph article you linked. I think it's a good start, but front page unfortunately doesn't translate into the web unless you have links to scans or digital versions of the original printed copy. Additional national UK press citations would be good, as would any international press citations. Local news citations however, are not needed. -Furicorn (talk) 03:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for helping so much. Yes my sandbox re-enlivened references are all to some of my own selected work as they need top be included (I followed my academic colleagues' short bios on Wiki for the way I wrote it as they insert their own references). Thank you for your help on these and taking links over from my Sandbox. The national press articles all have archived links, but there was an article about my research in the same paper about a year ago so I will see if it is still live or archived. Radio and TV have no live links to me due to licensing or copyright issues.I will rummage through my filing cabinet for originals of national press citations about me and my work and give you the names, dates, pages, headings if links are no good. Thanks again for amazing help when I had given up. A AnnQoLAge (talk) 12:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

PS I did have live links to places where I obtained my degrees etc and prizes etc after each reference to them so they must have disappeared as well. Oh dear! A AnnQoLAge (talk) 12:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I think your disappearing links happened when you copied the rendered text, not the markup text. There are histories of all published edits so you should be able to find them. At this point, due to WP:COI you should strongly limit editing the article although you can post edit requests (e.g. additional WP:RS) here on the talk page.
 * To others, here is an article from the Sunday Express in 2011. Perhaps having a paragraph or section on research supported by news stories to show notability. I personally like having the secondary source followed by the primary source (research paper), especially if they don't include a link in the article, but that probably is not recommended in the general WP guidelines. StrayBolt (talk) 18:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * You keep referencing colleagues, but unfortunately we do not know who they are. Do you have some colleagues you could link us to? If they have indeed passed the notability threshold, it may help establish notability in your case. Also with regards to archived links for the national press citations, it may be helpful to post the links on your sandbox, and let us know here. Especially if the articles are from the post-internet era, there is some sleuthing we may be able to do to find versions of the articles.


 * I think from now on, any article writing on this topic should stay in your sandbox, and if you want any specific changes made here, you can use the above-mentioned request edit template and ask for someone to look over whatever drafts you are proposing. Feel free to ask if you have any questions about how to use the template.


 * I've added a template to let people know that there is a connected contributor with a conflict of interest participating. She hasn't edited the article itself since the article was created. but it seems like it's ok if she keeps participating in this talk page as long as she's not editing the article itself? I don't have a lot of experience with working with WP:COI.


 * Finally,, as my response paragraphs are prefixed by  to indent my paragraphs to indicate I am the third level of response in this conversational thread, it would be helpful for me if you prefixed each of your paragraphs in your next response in this thread by with   to indicate your responses are the fourth level of response (in general, best practice is to add one more   to your paragraphs than the previous response had). I hope that's not too confusing! -Furicorn (talk) 19:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The referenced published papers and books are my own refereed publications. The links above are the national press articles about me written by people unconnected with me. I was asked to cite as many as possible and I will find more but even national newspaper archives are not all easy to search and find the live links for.I have not referenced any colleages. My live links disappeared so I have yet to go back into my sandbox and enliven links to my degree places, award places etc etc using auto cite help to ensure they stay live this time, as when I used the double square brackets as adviosed on WIKI guidance notes they do not stay live for me.there is no connected contributor to me with a conflict of interest only a Wiki person who volunteered to help me and whom I do not know. I thought that was very helpful of him/her. But I see I might have several helpers above here and that is really great of you all,thank you, or is it one main one above? Please can you advise me which of you I should update? When I have a day off soon I am going to go into my sandbox and re enliven my places re degrees, prestigious awards etc for verification using Wiki cite auto this time. Thank all. A AnnQoLAge (talk) 22:12, 30 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I added Google Scholar to the External links. Seems like they are high, perhaps enough for WP:PROF.
 * Should say that this article was discussed in Women in Red talk.
 * I realized you are focused on your article (and other things), but here are two articles threatened with deletion which I recently encountered that might benefit from your expertise: Older people's associations, Marios Kyriazis. You probably shouldn't cite your own work, but you can add others research. StrayBolt (talk) 00:13, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that you are really committing to try and stick with the process, and I'd like to reiterate that I'm very committed to doing my best to help you navigate Wikipedia's rocky shoals. I'm not sure how you are getting your messages, or who else you are talking with, but I (Furicorn) am the one who started the discussion at Draft talk:Ann Patricia Bowling and have been helping with the formatting here. A few other users who have participated in the discussion at this draft page are Kleuske and StrayBolt. You may also be having conversations in other places, but I'm not sure about that.
 * I feel like maybe I'm doing a bad job addressing your points, so I'm going to quote you this time
 * On the topic of colleagues: From your helpdesk question From your talk pageFrom your previous comment So what would be helpful for me is if you provide links in this discussion to the wikipedia pages or at least the names for the colleagues you are referencing. I don't know what their bios look like, so I have no context for what what those articles look like. It is possible their articles might be helpful in building your article
 * On the topic of connected contributors In this case, you are the connected contributor, because you are connected with your own biography. It's fine that you are participating on this talk page, and going forward you can make requests for edits, but as I think you've understood you shouldn't contribute directly to the article itself anymore (except in your sandbox). The reason the template is on here now is so that everyone who comes here knows right away that this is going on, and doesn't get confused and try to delete this page immediately, or repeat the same thing you've heard 30 times at this point (which I think you would agree would be unhelpful). It's just an attempt to increase the transparency so no one thinks something untoward is going on. I've followed the example at Talk:Doe Run Company, where a paid contributor who wanted to participate explicitly identified themselves, and requested that others make edits for them so as not to violate any policies.
 * On the topic of useful types of citations: in addition to news articles, it would also be helpful if you had other works that were citing your work, especially one of the following
 * Clinical Practice Guidelines
 * Meta-Analysis
 * Systematic Reviews
 * I've found 2 citations of your work,here and here but I imagine you might be more aware of where you are being cited.
 * One other thought I had is if you have any third-party sources that indicate how the OPQOL assessment is used - for instance is it a standard at the NHS or some other national health organization, that might be useful.
 * Finally, per my previous message, I've prefixed  to your previous message to improve readability. My current message paragraphs are prefixed with   to put them at the 4th indent level, so please prefix your next response with   (one more set of colons) to put it at the next indent level. I'm sorry to repeat myself, but it really does improve readability. If you would like to direct your response to someone in particular, please add   to your message (in my case, my name is Furicorn, so you would replace "Username" with "Furicorn" to direct a message to me). -Furicorn (talk) 00:47, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I started a conversation over at Notability for academics, and luckily someone over there (who I hope knows more than me) described 's citation record as "stunning", so I think we just need to focus on is figuring out who her colleagues on wikipedia are to get a sense of their citation records, finding evidence of her prior positions, and evidence for her book awards. This might be difficult, as I've been poking around and sadly there is not a ton available in any of those categories, but hopefully with her help we can solve that problem!  -Furicorn (talk) 03:25, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * (Is this right re: paragraphs are prefixed with  to put them at the 4th indent level, so please prefix your next response with  ) Dear Furicorn Thank you, can I deal with just you as I felt a bit bombarded yesterday but am very grateful for other people's help of course, but it gets confusing. The 2 citations to my work you found above were my own coauthored journal publications. Thanks for the stunning comment, and searching for me. I have about 200 publications in prestigious publications plus books etc and to see many just look me up in Google Scholar as I can't email you my CV, or you could look me up on the University of Southampton webpage/staff Ann Bowling/publications. I have lots of information about how OPQOL is used internationally, and the Australian Government has just asked permission to use it,  it is on the international, prestigious MAPI database to which I gave a link in my bio. As it is to be a short bio I will work on a short summary about it. Thank you. I will aim to do this on Friday in my Sandbox and let you know  and enliven yet again my degree unis, etc, and my prestigious award bodies using Wiki's cite/url etc/upload auto facility as the square brackets didn't enlive them twicer now. yes re the above above comment about adding in references to where I am cited in metaanalyses etc  - I will add a link to Holt Lunstad's metaanalysis on mortality where my work was included. I have been referenced in Gov reports and World Health Org reports but I can't cite them if they have now been archived as searches become too tedious for readers them. I will try to remember the 6 semi colons to start and the sign off. Thanks for all your help to you, and everyone also A AnnQoLAge (talk) 15:25, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Excellent use of the colon indentation, we'll make a wikipedian of you yet! While I will definitely commit to keep working with you, because of the nature of Wikipedia I can't stop others from trying to participate in this discussion, or talk with you more generally. That being said, I will try to take the lead in responding to any inquiries that happen here, and you can feel free to let me know if you need some help responding to people elsewhere. I added a small section on your work based on my best understanding and the discussion happening over at Notability (academics), and StrayBolt has added to the intro and honours section, as well as evidence for some of your awards and positions. I look forward to seeing your work. The last thing is, in order to keep indenting, you have to keep adding additional colons (a little convenient, I know). So I have 7 colons, so in your next response you can add 8 colons. Also, I'm a little curious how do you get messages/write responses? -Furicorn (talk) 18:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, just a couple other items:
 * Can you please name at least 2 or 3 people that you consider colleagues that already have wikipedia bios? Think of this draft as trying to build a case, and one of the boxes we have to tick to build the caseis to be able to point to comparable example bios when we want to publish this article.
 * Is there anyway to post your CV with the University of Southampton, or to add information about your previous postings to your university staff page? That way we could at least reference something online.
 * When you do manage to get around to writing in your sandbox on Friday, a couple sentences summarizing what you feel is the main thrust or contribution of your work for a lay audience would be helpful. I made a stab at it, but obviously I am not a specialist.
 * -Furicorn (talk) 19:12, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks Furicorn. OK 8 colons this time. I can't post my CV to University of Southampton as Faculties have control over our staff pages and their design, but it is on Linked In if you are a member, or register, and log in and find me. Is that possible? Three of my close academic colleagues with brief factual Wiki bios are prof Carl May University of Southampton, Prof Emily Grundy University of Essex, Professor Virginia Berridge London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and these are all places I do or have worked. I am of course grateful for everyone's help and useful points, but I like to find your's first to reply to, thanks, so this is good. A AnnQoLAge (talk) 18:31, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Those articles are VERY poorly sourced, please see Other stuff exists. Theroadislong (talk) 19:10, 1 August 2018 (UTC)


 * the formatting looks great. Thanks for the colleagues, I think is correct that those articles are suffering from poor sourcing, but obviously, that's why we're doing all this work on this bio to make sure we find sources for all the claims. However the main purpose of those names was mostly to give us points of triangulation for google scholar statistics. It's a small point in the overall case, but I think it's helpful that we have some points of reference now. Unfortunately, the problem with Linkedin is that you control the Linkedin page, so while it maybe a place to start, we probably can't end there. What might be better is if we can find press releases or blurbs about your work that were released while you were Professor at UCL, and which list your position (UCL is the only Professorship we don't have a 3rd party source for). -Furicorn (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Additional Sourcing
Thanks Well University of Soutyhampton independently put some my publications and selected other things on my staff page if you click on publications in here <==== Professor Ann Bowling | Health Sciences | University of Southampton ===

Ann Bowling is Professor of Health Sciences at the University of Southampton, read about her and her research here.> Any Google Scholar independently collates them in order of highest citations <=== Ann Bowling - Google Scholar Citations === 452, 2000. The prevalence of, and risk factors for, loneliness in later life: a survey of older people in Great Britain. CR Victor, SJ Scambler, ANN Bowling, J Bond.> I'll work on the press releases while I was at other universities today. The newpaper archives are not all user friendly backwards. thank yoiu for all. A AnnQoLAge (talk) 10:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC) And to Furnicorn UCL Discovery which finds staff publications has a number of mine if you want evidence I was at UCL when these were published (ResearchGate also finds me as past UCL staff === n Bowling's scientific contributions | University College London ... === Ann Bowling's 17 research works with 50 citations and 647 reads, including: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Ann Bowling has expertise in Medicine and ...

here is a few only from UCL Discovery=

https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=-0xkW7GAIsODsAf7jZtw&q=ann+bowling+ucl&oq=ann+bowling+ucl&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30k1.2429.6712.0.7135.15.13.0.2.2.0.74.728.13.13.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.15.733...0j0i131k1j0i10k1.0.i3HXY8j1JeE

''' Research methods in health. Investigating health and ... - UCL Discovery '''

by A Bowling - ‎2002 - ‎Cited by 4501 - ‎Related articles This new edition of Ann Bowling's well-known and highly respected text has been thoroughly revised and updated to reflect key methodological developments in ...

 [PDF]Quality of life from the perspectives of older people - UCL Discovery 

by Z Gabriel - ‎2004 - ‎Cited by 647 - ‎Related articles ZAHAVA GABRIEL* and ANN BOWLING*. ABSTRACT. This paper report results from a national survey of quality of life (QoL), based on. 999 people aged 65 or ...

''' [PDF]let's ask them: a national survey of definitions of ... - UCL Discovery '''

by A Bowling - ‎2003 - ‎Cited by 357 - ‎Related articles DEFINITIONS OF QUALITY OF LIFE AND ITS. ENHANCEMENT AMONG PEOPLE AGED 65 AND OVER*. ANN BOWLING. ZAHAVA GABRIEL. JOANNA DYKES. END od UCL DISCOVERY copy paste

Here is a Kingston and St Geoprge's Med School link stating I joined there https://www.kingston.ac.uk/news/article/249/25-nov-2010-leading-expert-joins-faculty-of-health-and-social-care-sciences/

''' Leading expert joins Faculty of Health and Social Care Sciences ... ' 25 Nov 2010 - Acclaimed social scientist Professor Ann Bowling has taken up a new ... College, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine'', and, ...

And this International Longevity Centre cites my work and place of employment there at the time too: ''' Supple joints and friendship - the keys to happiness in old age? ' According to the research, developed by Ann Bowling, Professor of Health Care ... at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine'', described how large ...

And here is an independent JSTOR link as evidence I was at the London School of Hygeine and Tropical Medicine when this paper on injuries to dancers was published and I have national press coverage of that which I am now searching for

https://www.jstor.org/stable/29702626?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

 njuries To Dancers: Prevalence, Treatment, And Perceptions Of Causes 

by A Bowling - ‎1989 - ‎Cited by 215 - ‎Related articles London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,. London WC1E7HT. Ann Bowling, phd, senior lecturer. BrMedJ 1989;298:731-4. Abstract. A survey of injuries ...

Journal Article

Injuries To Dancers: Prevalence, Treatment, And Perceptions Of Causes

Ann Bowling

Vol. 298, No. 6675 (Mar. 18, 1989), pp. 731-734

Published by: BMJ

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/29702626

I will go back to the newspaper serches now and the rest but meanwhile hoped this might help my evidence of places worked. All my former place of employment publications state my affiliation when written if ther paper is downloadable from Google, you will find them listed on the University of Southampton site on my staff page and scroll down to publications (most publications but only selected awards and committees are on  there for their web space limit reasons)

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/healthsciences/research/staff/ann_bowling.page#publications

Thanks AAnnQoLAge (talk) 13:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I moved your last message to a new topic and adjusted some of the formatting, I'm taking a look now. -Furicorn (talk) 16:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok, I was able to make use of the ResearchGate link and the press release from Kingston, and have added them as sources to the article.
 * The UCL Discovery service was not super helpful, I was unfortunately only able to find [one article attributed to you, and it was marked as published in 2012 so I'm not sure it will help us support the claim we want to make.


 * I don't have JSTOR access, maybe someone else can take a look at that - I was not able to find institutional affiliation information from what I could see
 * I clicked on a couple article links from your Southampton profile, I think some of the links will be useful to help establish your posting dates (Cambridge Press is looking very helpful, they have nice profiles of all publication authors that list information).
 * -Furicorn (talk) 17:35, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and I think I am up to 11 x : now. Re: above many of the articles should have full access facilities to download the full paper or abstract to see affiliation if you serch in Google or the journal site. I searched national press reports and independent articles about my work - some don't allow access without a fee or subscription, especially the Times, and the British Newspaper Archive online does not have all 21st century copies. After some hours I have successfully got the url live links to 'independent to me' features on, and decsriptions of, my work and they give my affiliation at the time. I am going to insert these below, followed bysome policy reports and evidence of my OPQOL, and a few lines on my contribution. Finally at the end I have the live links to the places of my qualifications/degrees and selected prestigious awards, given that my double brackets for these failed before. I thought I'd post it all here as to put some on Sandbox would be confusing. OK? Thanks again for your hours on this. Fingers crossed A AnnQoLAge (talk) 23:00, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


 * So re: my above information here it is below:


 * Must be up to 13 colons by now, OK? Thanks. For info I receive an email when you ask a question or mention in talk and then I log in and see if I can find the most recent.Many tahnks Ann AnnQoLAge (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh dear my day's live links for you are not here now and I published it, did they go to a new folder? I am copying it all in again here but it won't convert to wikitext only plaintext, maybe due to length:

Evidence live links as requested:

Publications in order of highest citations are viewable on Google scholar:

https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=zjfb30QAAAAJ&hl=en

National/international press reports which have INDEPENDENTLY described and reported on Ann Bowling’s work and stated university affiliation at the time:

Main feature in New Scientist 1993 included her research on dancers’ injuries (the research can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.298.6675.731) and stated affiliation then at St Bartholomew’s Hospital:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14019053-900-dying-swans-audiences-expect-their-ballet-dancers-to-be-wraith-like-graceful-creatures-but-the-price-may-be-too-high/

National press reports on her research projects and publications on ageing and ageism in health care, include these which also cite then affiliation at University College London:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/yourview/1542660/Are-the-elderly-less-deserving-of-the-best-medical-care.html

and its linked news report (front page):

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1542630/Shock-as-doctors-admit-to-ageism.html

and another:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-435991/Half-doctors-65s-low-priority.html

And on her research on cognitive decline, citing affiliation with University of Southampton:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voluntary-work-keeps-your-brain-sharper-xkhfkg667

Main contribution

Ann Bowling’s main research and policy contribution is on quality of life in older age. Her work led to her invited Annex on conceptual definitions on quality of life and well-being in the U.K. Chief Medical Officer annual report 2013: public mental health:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-medical-officer-cmo-annual-report-public-mental-health

It has been widely cited in policy reports aiming to promote well-being, including the Scottish Executive’s policy document on well-being, which stated the importance of her research on older people’s views of quality of life, see Chapter 1.6, sections 6.37 to 6.40,  Figure 6.4 and end references https://www.gov.scot/Publications/2006/01/13110743/6

Ann Bowling used this research to develop the Older People’s Quality of Life questionnaire (OPQOL):

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/cggr/2009/298950/; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167494312001835

Full length and short versions are available and can be used at no cost and without permission

http://www.ilcuk.org.uk/index.php/publications/publication_details/good_neighbours_measuring_quality_of_life_in_old_age

The OPQOL is used internationally in independent studies, including in Czechoslovakia https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-016-0494-7 ; Australia https://hqlo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12955-015-0357-7 ; China https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24118843.

Finally:

These are the live Wiki links in blue to my places of qualifications and awards, inserted after their citation as my square brackets for web links, following Wiki guidance before,  didn’t work. Please note my Selected work references 1,2,3 are in my original upload and sandbox copy, as are selected publications with their url links in Sandbox which I hope still work, otherwise I’ll re-find and re-enliven them. I was going to put the below in Sandbox but it might be too confusing. OK?


 * My apologies, I had to revert your last few edits as they unintentionally, but unfortunately, made this comment thread unintelligible. I did my best to try and retain your intent From now on, can you please post those sorts of things into your sandbox and direct me to review them there? This discussion page is for talking about the draft, but if you want to post any article edits I think it's best if it goes into your sandbox (I will not be confused). Separating those sorts of edits means we don't make the thread unfollowable. Also, for the future, if you post links in this talk page to your work, it's best to just post the URLs. Please don't worry about wikiformatting those. Finally, since we are currently using a new topic on Draft talk:Ann Patricia Bowling, we've restarted colons (colons are conversation specific), you can respond to this with 4 colons. -Furicorn (talk) 00:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


 * actually, make that 5 colons -Furicorn (talk) 01:07, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear Furicorn, see 5 colons here and 16 colons in Sandbox - please see the draft in Sandbox last part, where I added the information requested that was here, starting with the date and ending just before the references. I converted it to Wikitext there but I don't know if the urls work for you, if not I will redo them in Sandbox and use Cite/auto etc if you tell me to. Shall I just use 5 colons each time now? Thanks A AnnQoLAge (talk) 19:49, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * - each section of a talk page will have its own colon count, because each section of a talk page is typically viewed as a separate discussion thread. Here in this particular section of the Talk page to Draft:Ann Patricia Bowling, I am up to 6 colons, so you will use 7 in your response. If we were to start a new section on a different topic in this talk page, that section would have its own, separate colon count that would start over from zero. I have incorporated almost all the sources you recommended into the Draft article, but we are still missing URLs that have evidence of the following three 2 claims:
 * "Ïn July 2006, Bowling was elected Fellow of the Faculty of Public Health, of the Royal College of Physicians of the United Kingdom"
 * "Measuring health won Highly Commended in the Basis of Medicine section in the 1998 British Medical Association Medical Book Competition"
 * I think if you can provide links (to press releases or the like) for those 2 claims, we might be ready for a review of the article. -Furicorn (talk) 20:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear F Thanks for being so thorough. Ah I see the the BMA and RCP home page links on WikiI gave do not suffice then, suffice like my places of university degrees?  While I have found a url to the pdf of the BMA 2015 award which does name me and my book award  on page 15 of the pdf Awards 2015 - BMA

https://www.bma.org.uk/-/media/.../2015%20bma%20medical%20book%20awards%2... but The BMA did not upload its 1998 book awards back then or later, so I have emailed the contact at BMA Library to ask if they have an accessible archive with it. Also the RCP Faculty of Public health do not name their fellowships on their website anywhere for any year so I have emailed the membership secretary. I have the certificates which doesn't help for the url. I will reply again when they have responded. Oh dear it logged me out so rewrote this Best wishes A AnnQoLAge (talk) 09:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear Furicorn The BMA replied quickly with confirmation of my award but they say they didn't do online back then see below and I am have removed his name, so can we just use the general BMA url I inserted for 1998 and you have the valid url for the 2015 award anyway to insert; I am awaiting RCP FPH to reply next, thanks A: Original message


 * Dear Ruricorn as my email address was in my reply to you I have deleted it re: the BMA email stating they confirm my 1998 prize (and I have the url for my 2015 prize from them) and I now have a similar one from the RCP FPH so I am going to paste these at the end of my sandbox for you to see their confirmation and please just use the BMA general url I gave before for the 1998 prize, I will give you the 2015 url which has a url to a pdf in Sandbox, and just add the general RCP FPH url I gave before as they don't upload names to the internet - and as said the email will be in my sandbox as evidence as they will email me a pdf of my certificate. Thanks A AnnQoLAge (talk) 21:38, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for digging so deep. I'll try and ask around Wikipedia for more thoughts on how to properly cite these claims. -Furicorn (talk) 04:59, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Others just insert the general url to the institution's home page that I inserted earlier as individuals' names are not usually given on their websites (except in the url to the pdf for BMA 2015 prize that I gave you), as in places of degree and qualification awards. Hope that's OK. Best wishes A AnnQoLAge (talk) 09:21, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear Furicorn Just for our information here RCP FPH just emailed me a pdf of my RCP FPH Fellowship certificate and :::::::::::I have put the email minus names at the end of my Sandbox where, as before, my inserts show above the end references:
 * Please find attached a PDF certificate for your Fellowship awarded 27/09/06.
 * Please let me know if you require further assistance.
 * Best wishes,
 * Membership Officer
 * Best wishes A AnnQoLAge (talk) 09:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)


 * as was already mentioned in your sandbox, those emails are unfortunately not valid sources for these claims. With regards to other's wikpedia pages, I think it is important to note that there are many articles of poor quality on wikipedia. Claims of degrees from other institutions are generally unimportant in an academic bio except for those received honoris causa. Academics with multiple degrees are unremarkable and unnotable, so no one quibbles too much about sourcing those. What's important to source reliably are those things that set you above and apart in your field, which in your case are your multiple full professorships, your awards, your honors, and your extensive citation record. We've almost cited everything except the two items we've been discussing, so I feel like we're in the home stretch, and I'm going to ask around about ideas for citing those claims. -Furicorn (talk) 18:57, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Advice on next steps welcome. Best wishes A AnnQoLAge (talk) 11:43, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I was able to go around and tried to ask different groups for advice, waiting for a response now. -Furicorn (talk) 03:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you A AnnQoLAge (talk) 18:11, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

References do not need to be online
Hello all, just a quick note after seeing discussions here mentioned elsewhere. References (citations) on Wikipedia -- for proving notability or otherwise -- do not need to be accessible online ("live"). If a reliable source was published in, for example, 1998, with a significant statement or significant coverage about an individual, then it is entirely acceptable merely to cite that publication. (Anyone needing to verify it can do so by finding a published paper copy, as described at WP:SOURCEACCESS, "a print-only source may be available only in university libraries. Rare historical sources may even be available only in special museum collections and archives. Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access"). Of course, it is very helpful to have a working URL to anm online copy of the publication, but it is not essential. MPS1992 (talk) 18:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I think at this point the main problem for the outstanding citations is that we don't have any reliable sources for them. Especially with the Royal College of Physicians, it seems like it might be the case that there is no way to confirm if someone is a member. maybe you could reach out to the two organizations one more time to find out if any periodical might have published the results of the awards ceremony or induction (even a periodical behind a paywall). For the Royal College of physicians, if there is no such periodical, maybe you could find out if they have a mechanism whereby a member of the public or an institution checking a CV can confirm with the society that a particular physician is not making a false claim to membership? -Furicorn (talk) 01:08, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear Furicron (? colons to reply here OK?)- RCP FPH say there are no online references to names of awards recipients. Institutions who employed me received requested originals of degree and RCP FPH certificates and anyone who wishes to check can always email institutions anyway as I did and I previously pasted in above the repky that they sent me the pdf of mine. Other academics on Wiki just give the url to RCP FPH as I did originally without the need to verify their name too as a fellow - for example see my colleague's brif bio on Wiki: prof Virginia Berridge. OK? Thanks for all A AnnQoLAge (talk) 19:54, 26 August 2018 (UTC)


 * It's ok, I went ahead and adjusted the number (for this conversation it was 2). This is a fair point you raise, and I'm sorry that I just don't have enough experience in this sort of article to feel confident what good practice is around citation of fellowships. At this point, it seems like no one has any advice, and I only hesitate to use Virginia Berridge as a reference point since her page still has the "poorly sourced" tag applied. However if I can say anything, it's that I do notice that for her bio, someone did add a citation to her faculty page after the first sentence. The faculty page does list "Hon FRCP" after her name, which I assume the university wouldn't let her list unless they had indeed confirmed it. Since the "poor sourcing" tag is still on the article, I can't be sure that this fellowship is still not sourced enough, but it seems something worth trying.
 * So maybe, if you've confirmed it with your university there's a way to get it added to your name at your faculty page? I know that before you said that the university controls how your faculty bio page appears, so maybe your university will not allow you to list non-honorary society fellowships while her university does allow this. In any case, I placed this article in the queue for review which may take several weeks (or longer). So I think either someone will stumble upon the questions I've asked and give us an answer while it's awaiting review, or the person who eventually reviews it will have feedback about any issues preventing publication. In the end, it may be that I am worrying for no reason and this article is fine to publish as is, but we'll find out in due time. -Furicorn (talk) 00:41, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi I replied on another page which I can't find now: I have emailed Soton and asked if they can be replaced on my staff page, which is where they were before they revamped and shortened them a few years ago:


 * Will report back when they reply. Thanks for persevering A AnnQoLAge (talk) 10:33, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I think it's best not to post emails onto wikipedia, so I've gone ahead and removed that from this talk page. Do let me know when they reply (but please don't post the email). -Furicorn (talk) 02:36, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear Furicorn Soton have uploaded my short 2 page CV onto my staff page which can be opened by scrolling down the link below and clicking on cv, nd they will upload the 3 awards but do this together with another department responsible for uploading staff outputs PURE, son that will take a bit longer. Meanwhile my short CV on my staff webpage shows the 3 awards (and i previously gave you the weblink to the pdf online which lists my latest BMA 2015 book prize, let me know if you'd like me to give it to you again. The University of Southampton weblink to my staff page where my short CV can be accessed with all 3 awards meanwhile (is it enough for now?) is

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/healthsciences/about/staff/ab15g11.page?

Many thanks AAnnQoLAge (talk) 11:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear Furicorn Soton Admin and PURE have just now added back my 3 awards to my staff page now and they are three quarters ofnthe way down it before the link to my short CV see this cpy and paste from the link same https://www.southampton.ac.uk/healthsciences/about/staff/ab15g11.page?

Awards

Books:

1998 BMA Medical Book Competition, Highly Commended, Basis of Medicine, Ann Bowling Measuring Health: A review of quality of life measurement scales, 2nd edition, Open University Press.

2015 BMA Medical Book Awards 2015, Highly Commended, Basis of Medicine, Ann Bowling and McGraw Hill Education, Research Methods in Health, Investigating Health and Health Services, 4th edition, McGraw-Hill Education and Open University Press.

Professional:

2006 Faculty of Public Health, Royal College of Physicians of the United Kingdom, Ann Bowling elected Fellow of the Faculty of Public Health.

So is all OK now? Thanks for all A AnnQoLAge (talk) 11:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't break out the champagne just yet, but we're close enough that a nice slice of dessert is in order. I've used your staff page as references for those two claims, and at this point I think we've done the best we can. Unless anything else changes with regards to you finding a periodical piece about your honors, we are now just waiting on a reviewer. I am hopeful there's not much the reviewer will have to say since this draft has been touched by many pairs of hands, and been seen by even more pairs of eyes (I wonder how you would compare this process to peer review for a publication). Taking stock overall, I personally feel that this draft has navigated the many dangerous shoals that can lurk for someone trying to participate in creating their own biography, in no small part due to your patient and diligent cooperation. And, though this may just be my pride from participating in this process, when all is said and done you may even end up with the best wiki page of all your colleagues - or at least the "wikiest." -Furicorn (talk) 05:28, 1 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Dear Furicorn Thank you so much, as I had given up on it you offered to help, and your help has been superb and your patience re: filling in verification gaps really amazing. Yes it is certainly much more thoroughly verified than my colleagues' pages. Will await reviews then. [Journal publication reviewers start of with 3 with a knowledge of the topic (could even be a competitor!), which are usually anonymous but some journals insist on revealing their names and affiliations to authors, and they nit pick their way through the paper and data - to result in a better paper if issues are then addressed by the author. The better journals also send papers to a statistician to check the data. If there are conflicting reviews, they seek another reviewer and so on till the paper is rejected or accepted subject to the revisions suggested. If rejected the process starts all over again with the next journal.....Can be a nightmare and take a year with findings 'ageing'.] Thanks again, A AnnQoLAge (talk) 10:18, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear Furicorn Just found this page again so am repeating my message here in casae needed later. If you open this link to my journal paper on quality of life, at the bottom of the page are metrics which state it was referenced in one policy report – which is the policy report I gave you = the 2015 report of the Chief Medical Officer. This is just in case you later want a link to verify a policy report reference to my research on quality of life further.

https://jech.bmj.com/content/65/3/273

Statistics from Altmetric.com

See more details

Referenced in 1 policy sources

133 readers on Mendeley

Thanks A AnnQoLAge (talk) 18:02, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Moved to article space
I moved this to article space because as far as I could tell the AfC process is highly backlogged and a lot of work went into putting this article through a rigorous review even before any AfC review. Plus, wikipedia has the bar set way too high for female academic notability, as evidenced by stories of the rejection of Donna Strickland's article in May, before she was a Nobel laureate. Her work was certainly notable before the Nobel. Additionally, I suspect this article is more likely to be reviewed for having been moved to article space. -Furicorn (talk) 08:20, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Is anyone willing to help with updates please re updating my page
Ann Bowling Wikipaedia updates needed 2024 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Patricia_Bowling At the sub-title Books I need to insert ‘(selected)’ as below.

Books (selected) [edit]

And at end of Books I need to insert a recent 3rd book as below: Books (selected) [edit] ·       Bowling, Ann (2017). Measuring health: a review of subjective health, well-being and quality of life measurement scales (4th ed.). London: Open Univ Press. ISBN 978-0335261949. OCLC 951645229. ·       Bowling, Ann (2014). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (4th ed.). Milton Keynes. ISBN 9780335262755. OCLC 887254158. ·       Bowling, Ann (2023). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (5th ed.). Maidenhead Open Univ Press McGraw Hill.ISBC-13 9780335250929 ISBN10 9780335250929 eISBN 9780335250936 At the end of my Wikepedia page at External links three of my four links need updating: please delete these 2nd and 3rd links: ·       Older People’s Quality of Life Questionnaire (OPQOL) summed scoring and reverse coding ·       OPQOL-BRIEF questionnaire Links accessed 17 June 2018 and insert instead: ·       https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life Link accessed 1 February 2024. ·       https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life-brief-version  Link accessed 1 February 2024 The 1st link is correct and should remain as: Ann Patricia Bowling publications indexed by Google Scholar The last link web location has changed and needs updating to: The definition and measurement of well-being and quality of life in mental health promotion and outcomesRetrieved 1 February 2024. AnnQoLAge (talk) 16:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)


 * PS From Ann Some of my lines disappeared in the paste above so I am retrying here:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Patricia_Bowling
 * At the sub-title Books I need to insert ‘(selected)’.
 * And at end of Books I need to insert a recent 3rd book as below:
 * Books (selected) [edit]
 * ·       Bowling, Ann (2017). Measuring health: a review of subjective health, well-being and quality of life measurement scales (4th ed.). London: Open Univ Press. ISBN 978-0335261949. OCLC 951645229.
 * ·       Bowling, Ann (2014). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (4th ed.). Milton Keynes. ISBN 9780335262755. OCLC 887254158.
 * ·       Bowling, Ann (2023). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (5th ed.). Maidenhead Open Univ Press
 * McGraw Hill.ISBC-13 9780335250929 ISBN10 9780335250929 eISBN 9780335250936
 * At the end of my Wikepedia page at External links three of my four links need updating:
 * please delete these 2nd and 3rd links:
 * ·       Older People’s Quality of Life Questionnaire (OPQOL) summed scoring and reverse coding
 * ·       OPQOL-BRIEF questionnaire Links accessed 17 June 2018
 * and insert instead:
 * ·       https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life Link accessed 1 February 2024.
 * ·       https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life-brief-version  Link accessed 1 February 2024
 * The 1st link is correct and should remain as:
 * Ann Patricia Bowling publications indexed by Google Scholar
 * The last link web location has changed and needs updating to:
 * The definition and measurement of well-being and quality of life in mental health promotion and outcomes Retrieved 1 February 2024. AnnQoLAge (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to let you know that I'm currently doing my best to implement your requested changes in as best a way I am capable.  Dionysius Miller  talk 00:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ·       https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life-brief-version  Link accessed 1 February 2024
 * The 1st link is correct and should remain as:
 * Ann Patricia Bowling publications indexed by Google Scholar
 * The last link web location has changed and needs updating to:
 * The definition and measurement of well-being and quality of life in mental health promotion and outcomes Retrieved 1 February 2024. AnnQoLAge (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to let you know that I'm currently doing my best to implement your requested changes in as best a way I am capable.  Dionysius Miller  talk 00:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to let you know that I'm currently doing my best to implement your requested changes in as best a way I am capable.  Dionysius Miller  talk 00:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)