User talk:K18s/Archive 1

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014
The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the User WPMed template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors
Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Medical Translation Newsletter
 Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

Medical Translation Newsletter

Issue 1, June/July 2014 by CFCF, Doc James

sign up for monthly delivery



This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice. note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine

Spotlight - Simplified article translation

Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.

Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:
 * WHO's list of Essential Medicines
 * Neglected tropical diseases
 * Key diseases for medical subspecialties like: oncology, emergency medicine (list), anatomy, internal medicine, surgery, etc.

We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.

What's happening?

I've () taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.
 * IEG grant

For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.
 * Wikimania 2014

There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish. What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.
 * Integration progress


 * Swedish Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that. Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
 * Dutch Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
 * Polish Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article. (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
 * Arabic The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.

Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.
 * Integration guides

Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here

News in short


 * To come
 * Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
 * Proofreading drives


 * Further reading
 * Translators Without Borders
 * Healthcare information for all by 2015, a global campaign

Disambiguation link notification for February 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Corneal collagen cross-linking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Corneal ectasia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia. We have compiled a list of guidance for new editors:


 * 1) Use high quality sources for medical content. This is described at WP:MEDRS. High quality sources include review articles (note this is not the same as peer reviewed), position statements from national and internationally recognized bodies (think CDC, WHO, NICE, FDA, etc), and major medical textbooks. Lower quality sources may be removed.
 * 2) References go after not before punctuation (see WP:MOS)
 * 3) We use very few capital letters and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
 * 4) Do not use the url from the inside net of your university library. The rest of the world cannot see it.
 * 5) If you use textbooks we need page numbers.
 * 6) Please format your references as explained at WP:MEDHOW or like the ones already in the article. This is simple once you get the PMID / ISBN.
 * 7) Every sentence can be referenced. We reference more densely than other sources.
 * 8) Never "copy and paste" from sources. We run copy and paste detection software on new edits.
 * 9) Section order typically follows the instructions here at WP:MEDMOS
 * 10) Please talk to us. Wikipedia works by collaboration and this takes place on the talk pages of both articles and user.

Again welcome and thank you for joining us.

P.S. Please share this with fellow new editors.

James Heilman a.k.a User:Doc James MD, CCFP(EM), Wikipedian Faculty of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine University of British Columbia

and

The Team at WikiProject Medicine Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 17:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Why
Did you just remove the best avaliable source on the topic ? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't remove it. it was repeated twice, I moved one of them to the end of the last paragraph in the lead section. k18s (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Feel free to find a better place for it. but please don't repeat it in multiple sections. k18s (talk) 18:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If you read WP:LEAD everything in the lead should be covered in the body of the article. Thus it should be in both places. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 18:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Doc James I don't understand why the exact same sentence should be repeated twice?! is there any way to make it look better? k18s (talk) 18:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure adjusted the second occurrence. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 18:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's better. something similar should be done for the approval section too. I also just noticed that you correctly redirected PROSE article which was very promotional to scleral lens, I wanted to fix that for long time but I wasn't sure if it is right to redirect it. I wish it had some better photos for the size comparison. k18s (talk) 18:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What do you think about giving cross-linking its own H3 section under the treatments? its purpose is so different with other surgical options. k18s (talk) 19:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that is undue weight and thus oppose it. We can keep it under surgery or even better we can move it to research as evidence does not currently support the procedure. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Investigation
As you have likely noticed there's a lot of paid editors in the area you work. I have asked for someone to look into it to see if they are related to each other. Feel free to comment here. Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 02:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Moved from WP : SI: No CU has been run. Your rephrasing of the Cochrane review was concerning. Unfortunately with all the paid editing in this topic area it becomes harder to AGF. We have had a bunch of editors making claims of not being paid and then turning out to be part of the OM ring. Anyway it is a sad position for us to be in. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:16, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


 * As you may have guessed, I am not experienced in En-WP. I thought adding that as a ref would make you happy, I also tried copying your own text from CXL article in this edit which apparently wasn't acceptable. as someone who has KC and talked with many KC patients, I know every single early-stage KC patient on the internet is looking for information about CXL and we should provide more information about it. k18s (talk) 03:52, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * OM stands for Orangemoody which is this case . A bunch of the socks were editing about eye related stuff and Brian Boxer Wachler Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:31, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Wow! do all the 381 accounts have one puppeteer? by the way, shouldn't Brian Boxer Wachler be included in this list?
 * I understand your situation, but this CU case was very unexpected, specially that I have never been a fan Wachler's advertising methods and as he claims regarding Steven Holcomb, I don't believe that CXL is cure for KC, yet.
 * About the keratoconus, if we move the cross-linking to a "research" section, would it be possible to add more text/information? can we also add info about less common developing treatments like microwave thermoplasty (Keraflex), or this one? k18s (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Not really unexpected. We have seen issues of it for months.
 * With respect to sourcing we need to use high quality secondary sources that are at least pubmed indexed. This is not one of those.  Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:43, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)