User talk:Shaze

Clinical Trials
Hello. Wikipedia strongly encourages secondary sources for biomedical information. One of your references is a primary source. There are many clinical trials currently being conducted for COVID-19. This is a rapidly evolving area, with information outdated in a day or less.

For instance, lopinavir/ritonavir which you mention, has been found to be ineffective - well designed study published in highly reputable The New England Journal of Medicine

Also, chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine has indications of toxicity and being ineffective

More drug details can be found in the specific article - Solidarity Trial, which is linked in the first sentence.

I will thus use a secondary source(s) and move the specific drug info. because the purpose of the article is not to summarise the arms of an ongoing clinical trial, whose results have not been reported even in primary literature. Readers might think the clinical trial medications/drugs you mention are legitimate therapeutic options, when new studies show otherwise. If you disagree, please do not revert my edits, but instead use the article's talk page.




 * Ear-phone (talk) 00:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure why the ping? Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 00:48, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Hello because you're arguably the most skilled Wikipedian regarding these matters. Your input would assist. Thank you. Ear-phone (talk) 01:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I don't exactly understand what the whole issue is about, but my stand is to use secondary sources, systematic reviews and meta analyses wherever possible in all medical articles. Solidarity Trial is ongoing and it is too early to say if any of the drugs used in the trial are effective or not. -- Netha  (talk)  08:39, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm happy for the content to be reworded in order to add explicit caution in case a reader misunderstands and wants to self-dose, but I think the point's been missed. The purpose of what I added was to report on what clinical trials are being done in South Africa as well as related clinical responses, not the outcomes of the trials. Your points imply that somehow I was endorsing those drugs which is not to be found or even implied in what I wrote. It is a fact that the initial drugs that were in the test are the ones that I wrote. I really don't think that this can be disputed and if you are reporting what actually happened in South Africa, you have to report that, whether or not the drugs turn out to be successful or safe. All that was reported is that the trial was happening and I think this is a good reference for it. I would agree that if we were reporting the *outcome* of the trial it would not be a good reference. The Solidarity Trial is an important and relevant international medical response, and it is relevant to include South African contributions on this page. So I strongly disagree with the decision to cut it on those grounds, which I think are wrong. If the decision had been made on more editorial grounds -- that it was unnecessary detail in the context of an article which is likely to become very big -- I am happy to live that that.


 * Hello . I am the one who made the changes. I pinged, a physician, as the creator of the Solidarity Trial article. So far, the consensus is that the more specific clinical trial details are unnecessary on a page that is trying to capture a whole country response rather than describe medications under investigations by a particular trial. There is a whole Wikipedia article dedicated to the trial. Ear-phone (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

CoViD-19 Gauteng stats?
Re File:Gauteng-covid19.svg, can you add your sources for this? I'd like to use the most recent figures for the map. -- Jeandré, 2020-05-15t13:03z Done

File:Za-covid-actives.svg as-of and comment dates.
Re: the as-of and update dates at e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COVID-19_pandemic_in_South_Africa&diff=1043650761&oldid=1043621545 and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Za-covid-actives.svg - shouldn't it be for the day before, because data for 2021-09-11 can't be available at the upload date and time of 2021-09-11T06:50:07. So shouldn't the legend1 and upload Comment date be for 2021-09-10? -- Jeandré, 2021-09-16t10:18z

South African Discord
Hi, I would like to invite you to the Wikimedia South Africa Discord Server.

Discord allows instant text, voice and video communication and is used for all the South Africa Wikipedians monthly meetups.

See Meetup/South Africa, the next one is on 26 February 2022 at 10:00am SAST Meetup/South_Africa/South_Africa_15

TapticInfo (talk) 10:14, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)