User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2012/December

Your edit in Stem Cell / Cord Blood / effectiveness claim
Hi, thanks for your corrections, but...

in | Stem cell: Difference between revisions you "toned down effectiveness claim" which is not appropriate, please see :

http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1186/1741-7015-10-3/fulltext.html#Fig2_491

References should be analyzed before a statement is changed. Your text "CB-SCs are the active agent in stem cell educator therapy, which is in pre-clinical studies" is not correct, because the pre-clinical studies (animal trials) were finished in 2009 and 2010.

The phase I human clinical trials have also been finished in Jan. 2012 and Oct. 2012.

Effectiveness of the therapy has been proven in these human studies as well as could be verified here :

http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1186/1741-7015-10-3/fulltext.html#Fig3_491

Why do you doubt that ? But I have to admit that before the therapy is approved we should be careful. I changed the sentence to "CB-SCs are the active agent in Stem Cell Educator Therapy, which has therapeutic potential against autoimmune diseases like type 1 diabetes as Pre-clinical studies and clinical trials have demonstrated." Would you support this formulation ? Leo181 (talk) 10:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you have not yet made yourself sufficiently familiar with wp:MEDRS and wp:MOSMED. That's o.k., you are new here and a learning curve is normal :-)  We rely on current, peer-reviewed, independent, secondary publications to assess the science, as the pseudonymous editors here cannot demonstrate qualification to do so. This is a fallout of our wp:ANYONECANEDIT and wp:NOR precepts, which make Wikipedia rather different from other publications. What you are using is neither independent nor secondary. For such sources, we are very circumspect in using them, and explicitly avoid putting their findings in the voice of the encyclopedia. Instead, if we can only find primary sources, we couch statements in phrasing which makes it clear to the reader that we are discussing a specific writer's work, with in-text attribution. Even then, we must be careful not to give wp:UNDUE prominence to these lower-reliability sources. With regard to independence, your declared proximity to an author of these papers is both a help and a hindrance.  While you are less likely to misinterpret their meaning, you may be too willing to accept their correctness and their importance.


 * Accordingly, to use that source an acceptable formulation would be more like "In a 2012 paper Zhao et al. reported finding that ..." (with a full citation at the end of the statement). However, it would be far better to find an independent review to give the reader confidence that the finding matters, in which case the review's assertions can be taken as simple fact, not requiring the wp:INCITE. Clear?


 * Keep up the good work. LeadSongDog come howl!  16:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

got Dr. Karel Styblo
Hi LeadSongDog! I've got it, the whole bulletin. But where I have to send it to? Greetings, -- Doc Taxon (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Badema, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sono (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:26, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Skamecrazy123 (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Lalita sahasranama (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Banda, Sati, Aruna and Vimala

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:29, 24 December 2012 (UTC)