User talk:Medstudedit

Orphaned non-free image File:Paul Mellon Centre.svg
 Thanks for uploading File:Paul Mellon Centre.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Page moves
Hi, when you move a page, please also move the corresponding talk page, so that these things stay together. If you cannot do this because a talk page exists at the target title, tag that with (provided the move really is not controversial) and wait until it has been deleted before finalizing the move. Please also make sure that you only move pages if "the" very clearly is not part of the official name of an entity, otherwise NCTHE does not apply. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 11:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Please stop moving pages, as you are doing several that are incorrect. The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research and The Institute for Clinical Social Work, for example. If "the" is an official part of the title of an entity, then it should be part of the WP article. In addition, even where your moves may be correct, you leave the articles as they are, so that there is a disconnect between the articles and the article titles. Continuing making this kind of moves is disruptive, so please take a breath and familiarize yourself with the appropriate guidelines before making further moves. --Randykitty (talk) 12:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have checked some of your moves. Some were good. More were incorrect and I have reverted them. However, I have better things to do today than checking these moves, so I didn't do all of them. Please carefully check yourself and undo those moves that were incorrect. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 12:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The Feinstein Institute is consistently used on their "about" page (http://www.feinsteininstitute.org/about-us/). I would trust that page more than a press release (even from the same website). Also, per WP:BOLD, if you make an edit and somebody contests it, you don't simply revert again, but you go to the talk page to discuss it. I contested your move, re-enacting such a contested move then is not what you should do. Please move it back and take it to the talk page. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 21:13, 26 July 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) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit summary
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting. Thanks! Drchriswilliams (talk) 20:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Doctor of Medicine
Hi. Regarding this edit. Wikipedia articles should be written to deal with their subjects on a broad level, covering the topic (where appropriate) on an international basis and not just reflecting practices in English speaking countries. Your version implies that there are two versions of the degree of Doctor of Medicine, originating from the United Kingdom and the United States respectively. This is not the case. It would be more accurate to say that in some countries (like the US), MD is the first medical qualification conferred on a doctor, whereas in other countried (like the UK), it reflects a higher postgraduate qualification. --Kwekubo (talk) 03:05, 28 December 2016 (UTC)