User talk:Spyder212

 Medical disclaimer

The medical information I share on Wikipedia cannot be relied upon as medical advice.

I do not offer healthcare advice online.

Wikipedia can be edited by anyone.

If you need information about any health condition, please see a qualified healthcare provider.

Then perhaps skim through Wikipedia to find background information on your condition.

February 2016
Hi Spyder212! I'm from the team at Osmosis who are creating CC-BY-SA medical videos and posting them on Wikipedia articles. We'd like to translate the subtitles to our videos into French and Spanish. It looks like you're partly in charge of both of those WikiMedicine Translations teams. Could you email me at kyle@slinn.ca? Thanks! OsmoseIt (talk) 17:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

May 2015
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Canadian Ski Patrol has been reverted. Your edit here to Canadian Ski Patrol was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.cspssaultzone.weebly.com) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 18:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I removed the link even though it is that specific zone's official website as it is not necessarily required in the article. --Spyder212 (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
E. Feld talk 21:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Spyder212! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 00:26, Thursday, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Spyder212! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 00:31, Thursday, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Spyder212! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 00:52, Thursday, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
E. Feld talk 23:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Student in classes
Hi Spyder212. I'm Adam, a content expert for the Wiki Education Foundation. I got a note from a professor in one of the courses you've subscribed to. They are using the course page (and our dashboard) to track their students' edits and since you're enrolled in the class, your edits are showing up as well. I don't know what the policy or guideline is on enrolling in these courses, but would you mind removing yourself as a student so that they can use the dashboard to check their work without wondering if a username belongs to a student of theirs or not (professor mostly write down student usernames but don't commit them to memory)? Thank you. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:21, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Removed from course
Hi Spyder212- I removed you as a student from my course since (1) you are not actually a student in the course and (2) your activity has overwhelmed the stream of activity from students who are in the course. Feel free to use the resources or anything else you may find useful on the course page. Biolprof (talk) 17:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Education Program class enrollment
Hi there. I'd like to follow up on 's message above. I think it's great you'd like to get involved with classes and/or the education program! However, for reasons along the lines of what Adam explains above, we've had a few professors express concern and/or confusion, so I went ahead and removed you from those classes. The only time someone should be enrolled in such a class who isn't a student is if they have an arrangement with the instructor first. But it's true that's not clearly stated anywhere, so please don't think I'm saying you've done anything wrong. If you'd like to talk more about ways to get involved, you can just reply to this message. If you have a particular interest in one of the classes, you're welcome to contact the instructor listed on its course page. Thanks very much. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 12:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there any way I can act as a course volunteer for some of those classes? I have lots of experience on Wikipedia as I have been editing for nearly a decade, and some of the topics, especially those touching upon biomedical sciences, are of particular interest for me. --Spyder212 (talk) 22:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Course volunteers are typically arranged with the instructor. In general those volunteers are typically either staff at the Wiki Education Foundation, campus or online ambassadors, or other Wikipedians who have an arrangement with the instructor. I saw your follow-up on the Education Noticeboard indicating you're no longer interested in becoming an ambassador, but you're welcome to contact the instructors individually to offer your help if you want to. I think many would welcome it, especially those people at schools outside the US and Canada as they may have fewer options for support. If you're particularly looking to help out with biomedical topics, I'd also strongly recommend getting involved with WikiProject Medicine if you haven't already. It's one of the most active WikiProjects on the site and many people there get involved with student work. You could leave a message on the WikiProject talk page asking about ways you could help. Can I ask, did you edit under a different name before or do you tend to edit anonymously? --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the tips! I will attempt contacting a few instructors to make arrangements. And yes, I will be moving temporarily to Whitehorse, so I won't be able to participate as much as I want to with Wikimedia. As for Wikipedia and WikiProject Medicine, I have been editing anonymously for more or less a decade, more regularly for half a decade or so, and I just recently decided to create an account. --Spyder212 (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia
Hi there, I just wanted to welcome you, and invite you to introduce yourself to emergency medicine doctor and Wikipedian extraordinaire User:Doc James and public health enthusiast User:Bluerasberry. I'm sure that they'd be delighted to hear of another medical expert contributing to Wikipedia. I'd also like to invite you to participate in Wikiproject Medicine.

Let me know if you need help with anything. --Pine✉ 20:08, 22 May 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) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Disambiguation link notification for January 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
 * Guy Breton ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Guy_Breton check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Guy_Breton?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Fellowship
 * Suzanne Fortier ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Suzanne_Fortier check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Suzanne_Fortier?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Crystallographer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia! We have compiled some guidance for new healthcare editors:
 * 1) Please keep the mission of Wikipedia in mind. We provide the public with accepted knowledge, working in a community.
 * 2) We do that by finding high quality secondary sources and summarizing what they say, giving WP:WEIGHT as they do.  Please do not try to build content by synthesizing content based on primary sources.
 * 3) Please use high-quality, recent, secondary sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS; for the difference between primary and secondary sources, see the WP:MEDDEF section.) High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed. Please beware of predatory publishers – check the publishers of articles (especially open source articles) at Beall's list.
 * 4) The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS. The section above the table of contents is called the WP:LEAD. It summarizes the body. Do not add anything to the lead that is not in the body. Style is covered in MEDMOS as well; we avoid the word "patient" for example.
 * 5) We don't use terms like "currently", "recently," "now", or "today". See WP:RELTIME.
 * 6) More generally see WP:MEDHOW, which gives great tips for editing about health -- for example, it provides a way to format citations quickly and easily
 * 7) Citation details are important:
 * 8) *Be sure cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books
 * 9) *Please include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article, and please format citations consistently within an article.
 * 10) *Do not use URLs from your university library that have "proxy" in them: the rest of the world cannot see them.
 * 11) *Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
 * 12) We use very few capital letters (see WP:MOSCAPS) and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
 * 13) Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities. Avoid overlinking!\
 * 14) Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
 * 15) Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us! Please share these guidelines with other new editors.

– the WikiProject Medicine team Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 23:30, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Uptodate
Uptodate is not the best source as one cannot reference a specific version. Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 23:35, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip! I had not noticed this particularity of UpToDate. Spyder212 (talk) 17:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia from the Anatomy Wikiproject!
Welcome to Wikipedia from WikiProject Anatomy! We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of anatomy articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are involved in editing anatomy articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, here are a few relevant things:
 * Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
 * You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing anatomy articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
 * We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
 * We write for a general audience. Every reader should be able to understand anatomical articles, so when possible please write in a simple form—most readers do not understand anatomical jargon. See this essay for more details.

Feel free to contact us on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. I wish you all the best on your wiki-voyages! Tom (LT) (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

D. Gregory Powell
Hello! I see that you moved D. Gregory Powell to Dr. Gregory Powell because you thought "D." was a typo for "Dr." I know you did this is good faith, but I have moved it back. "D." is his first initial; his accurate name is "D. Gregory Powell". We do not use titles like "Dr." in article titles. -- MelanieN (talk) 23:55, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message! Spyder212 (talk) 03:08, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Wireless Institute of Australia
My edit to Wireless institute was right, please restore — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toowoomba4350 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * , I believe you have restored a correct version of "u sed torepresent". Spyder212 (talk) 22:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

How are my edits to Lost in Space "vandalism"? (A response to February 2019
I will be respectful in my response to your post on my talk page; but I would like to ask you: How are my edits to the article of TV series "Lost in Space" vandalism when they were simple, inoffensive edits, just like I would fix or add on information to other articles? (I am especially asking this because you actually thanked my edit too, which got me curious.) WaylonSmithers73 (talk) 15:56, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out! I believe I attempted to revert edits that were done before yours, but since yours were done successively, I probably rollbacked once and they all followed through. Sorry about that! I have restored your edits done to Lost in Space and removed the warning on your talk page. Do continue to edit constructively! --Spyder212 (talk) 17:50, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Jim Gray (sportscaster)
You are restoring unsourced content that may be removed at will per WP:BLP. Please be careful with that. Materialscientist (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input! I was reviewing the previews versions and about to make the move! Will watch out for that! Spyder212 (talk) 00:56, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 00:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Amy Schwartz Moretti
Hello Spyder212. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Amy Schwartz Moretti, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Endowed chair at a major university is a pass of NPROF and at the very least is a claim of significance . Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:03, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice! Spyder212 (talk) 19:11, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

hyphen
Hello. I am confused as to why you deleted the hyphen here: 31st-most. --2604:2000:E010:1100:5C71:7123:9345:C316 (talk) 02:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! Simply not needed within that sentence structure. Cheers, Spyder212 (talk) 03:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

"which lists"
IMO this is not needed.

It is already called a list, it is a given that it lists something. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:25, 31 March 2019 (UTC)


 * My perception was that the sentence structure was better with that pronoun and transition was smoother, but I agree that lists typically list items! Spyder212 (talk) 04:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Pregnancy
Ref says "There are no controlled data in human pregnancies." thus the "but has not been well studied in this group of people"

Not sure your thoughts? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I see the difficulty in gathering such data. However, CDC 2018 states that chloroquine has not been found to increase the risk of adverse fetal events when used in recommended doses for malaria chemoprophylaxis in pregnant women traveling in chloroquine-sensitive malaria areas. As for treatment of malaria, chloroquine use in pregnancy is well tolerated and without known harmful effects on the fetus. Perhaps based on the fact that treatment benefit outweighs risk to pregnancy and fetus. My feeling is that for the pregnant lady who reads up on chloroquine, I believe it should be clear, at least in the introduction, that the medication is considered safe. CDC, both in its Treatment Guidelines and Yellow Book, UpToDate, Merck Manuals all state the same recommendations concerning chloroquine use in pregnancy. See:

Spyder212 (talk) 21:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * CDC Treatment Guidelines
 * Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Health Information for International Travel 2018: The Yellow Book.
 * D'Alessandro U, Hill J, Tarning J, Pell C, Webster J, Gutman J, Sevene E. Treatment of uncomplicated and severe malaria during pregnancy. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(4):e133. PMID 29395998.
 * Okay with the CDC taking a stronger position, I am happy with your change. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 21:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: -- ferret (talk) 12:33, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Symptoms versus complications
Generally I just add an item to one place rather than both. Your thoughts with respect to self harm? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:46, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree! Both suicide/suicide attempt and self-harm are part of the diagnostic criteria for BPD, but they are mostly complications resulting from the impulsivity of the disorder itself. Removing them from symptoms as they are present in complications seems fair! Spyder212 (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Well self harm and attempted suicide yes. But not suicide as those are dealt with by pathologists not psychiatrists.
 * I would say the first two are symptoms will suicide (were death occurs) would be a complication. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Suicide is definitely a complication! But I think self-harm could be one as well... Many times these patients present to the ER with self-inflicted injuries: wrist lacerations, self-stabbing resulting in penetrating abdominal injuries, etc. Complications can lead to mortality but also morbidity, which I believe self-harm does in many cases. Spyder212 (talk) 19:41, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Ref

 * Chowdhury SH, Cozma AI, Chowdhury JH. Incontinence - Adult. Essentials for the Canadian Medical Liscensing Exam: Review and Prep for MCCQE Part I. 2nd edition. Wolters Kluwer. Hong Kong. 2017.

Are you refering to this?

https://www.amazon.ca/Essentials-Canadian-Medical-Licensing-Exam/dp/1451186886/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0/136-7645812-5582517?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=1EQTTXEG9E991GPAY9TM

The year of publication however is different? A PMID is very useful. Also a page number if you have it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, same cover page! Strange, however, my copy has 2017 as year of publication written inside the manual... Probably a typo as with all the other typos throughout. Spyder212 (talk) 01:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 2016 does make sense actually. Otherwise, I would never have used it for MCCQE. Spyder212 (talk) 01:44, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Deleted photo
Hi,

I has asked for a photo of mine to be deleted, the photo is totally mine so there is no copyright problems I was happy to let Wikipedia use it but maybe I didn't do it correctly. The photo on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Dillon is ancient and a more up to date one should be used, can we please sort this out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quebear40 (talk • contribs) 12:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree it is an old photo; however, the one you added was under investigation for possible copyright infringement... Old picture is better than no picture. Spyder212 (talk) 16:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry
I'm meant to put the image onto the frwiki article, obviously, because of the French caption. My mistake. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Changing protected info
Hi,

I wonder if you could help on the Headstonesband and Hugh Dillon the start date of 1987 is wrong it should be 1989, but I'm not sure how or if it can e changed.

Thanks

Karon (quebear40)
 * Hi, Do you have any sources affirming the band started in 1989? Both the article on Hugh Dillon and the Headstone band state it started in 1987 with sources... Spyder212 (talk) 00:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Why did you delete Juan Manuel González (racing driver)?
99721829Max (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Thank you,  PA TH  SL OP U  Spyder212 (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Headstones forming date
Hi,

If you look online there actual official logo states "Making Bad Life Choices Since 1989--Quebear40 (talk) 21:07, 17 May 2019 (UTC)Quebear40

Nurse Practitioner Entry
Hi, the statement containing “some” medications, and treatments etc wasn’t correct in the first place. Despite “restricted” practice states, there generally isn’t a limit on what a NP can do, it just have to be with an agreement with a physician. NPTruth (talk) 12:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Exactly what the nature of these agreements implies. If this statement is entirely false, you may provide a reliable source indicating otherwise. Currently in all Canadian provinces and territories and in 38 states of the United States, practice is restricted by official legislation or formal agreements with supervisory physicians. Spyder212 (talk) 13:43, 1 June 2019 (UTC)


 * No, you are incorrect with the erroneous statement. The agreements don’t restrict what a NP can prescribe, diagnose or treat. That is defined in state law. Have you actually seen a collaborative agreement? You are making assumptions as to what is contained in them. There are general templates but There is no source that states what is and what isn’t in every written collaborative agreement in those states and providences. A sample can be found here (http://www.op.nysed.gov/prof/nurse/np-sample-collaborative-agreement.pdf). And it’s clear that these are not supervisory in nature. I see that you reverted my edits back, where do we go from here?


 * In fact, I have collaborative agreements with two primary care NPs in Canada. My colleagues have similar agreements as well, both in primary care and acute care specialties such as neonatology and cardiology. The process differs somewhat from the U.S., but from what I can see in the sample you provide, it is clearly written, "prescribing medications for patients whose conditions fall within the authorized scope of the practice as identified on the college certificate..." Why would that be written if there is no restriction? All NPs I work with and those in Canada have practice restrictions on conditions they can treat autonomously, medications they can prescribe, and treatments they can deliver to patients. In addition, there is mention of practice protocols which must be described in your collaborative agreement sample. From recent meetings with colleagues that practice south to the border, it seems clear that restrictions do apply to their NP colleagues in most states. If that is not the case, please do provide a reliable source that states black on white that there are absolutely no restrictions to practice. Diagnose everything, treat everything, prescribe all you want... There were efforts to make practice independent for 2015, but no update since then... over 4 years later. Spyder212 (talk) 03:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi Spyder212. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3ASpyder212 enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

Re: Endovascular aneurysm repair
Hi, You changed "reasons to avoid" to "relative contraindications". I don't like "reasons to avoid" either but was sticking with it because it was more straightforward. Has there been consensus about this elsewhere? thx BakerStMD 17:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have seen it used sporadically in other articles on Wikipedia, but I don't think there is any consensus. I noticed there is a short article explaining what a contraindication is and the difference between absolute and relative- was thinking of adding the link. Your thoughts? Spyder212 (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Wilms tumour
Thank you for your comment. Such remarks are sadly rare on WP. Virion123 (talk) 17:13, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You are very welcome, Virion123. Always great to see good contributions! Cheers, Spyder212 (talk) 18:00, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Question
How do you cite sources in code when WP:PROVEIT applies so it's NOT taken as Vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:B:982:0:0:0:1 (talk) 23:45, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Snowden edit
Hi Spyder212,

Just a quick note. Thank you so very much for supporting me on the Snowden editting toward NPOV. I run the risk of being viewed as conducting a 1 man edit war if others don't also revert the changes and get rid of the whistle-blower anti-NPOV labeling.

Would you be willing to get others to chime in with this in edit form? Too many in talk are talking about this, but not doing anything. :( 𝓦𝓲𝓴𝓲𝓹𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓘𝓼𝓝𝓸𝓽𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭-𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓡𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓮𝔀𝓮𝓭𝓑𝔂𝓟𝓮𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓞𝓷𝓵𝔂 (talk) 19:07, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

 * please help translate this message into your local language via meta

Thanks again :-) --  Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Will consider joining! Spyder212 (talk) 02:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Amiodarone reference removed.
I did indeed cite the The FDA' MedWatch website.... and I included the link to the Amiodarone WARNING on the FDA'a website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.67.125 (talk) 19:52, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Atorvastatin thanks
Greetings, Spyder212. Thank you for your acknowledgement of my clean-up edit at the Atorvastatin page. I wish there was a simple "You're welcome!" button one could hit to do so. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 01:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted
Hi Spyder212. Your account has been added to the " " user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember: The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. ~Swarm~ {sting} 01:26, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging  pages for  maintenance so  that  they are aware.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
 * If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

Dee Murray
Hi,

I understand, I was trying to save as a draft until I had my references sorted. I have now edited the page to only include the bits that are referenced. We can edit as we go along.
 * Hi! The article's deletion was based on its lack of notability, not so much the references. Please see Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Spyder212 (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Question about the speedy deletion nomination of Cold War (rugby union)
Hi,

I was wondering why this page was not moved to a draft instead of the result that occured.

FlashFarach (talk)
 * Hi! You may create the article in the drasft space while building it. Sending it into the mainspace too early with low quality references and without any evidence of notability will get the article deleted unfortunately. I suggest you review the general notability guidelines. Spyder212 (talk) 18:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Tongi Govt. College
Hello Spyder212, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tongi Govt. College, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Barkeep49 (talk) 19:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! Will definitely do review those. Spyder212 (talk) 19:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your review of the new article I created, Women of the White Buffalo, what do you think of the article? Right cite (talk) 21:47, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Beautifully written! 'Twas a pleasure to read. Spyder212 (talk) 02:43, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Might you be more specific?
Your explanations sound bureaucratic, can you articulate the specific reasons for deleting Pluto in Scorpio Generation? Dudanotak (talk) 04:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Does not meet general notability guidelines, and simply seems like an elaborate version of WP:QUACKS. Spyder212 (talk) 04:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

thank you!
I have never written a wikipedia page before, but I know more about Tom Osler than probably anyone alive. I thank you greatly for suggestions for improvement and welcome all suggestions. Thank you also for your contributions to this wonderful website.

peace, Skymath1 (talk) 17:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)


 * You are welcome! You are making wonderful improvements to the article. However, for the subject to qualify for inclusion into Wikipedia, we must demonstrate that they are notable. Why them and not all the other mathematics professors out there? Please see the criteria at WP:PROF. Spyder212 (talk) 22:57, 23 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I think you erred in nominating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Osler for deletion. The AfD page of the previous version of the article (Tom Osler) indicates that he qualifies for notability on several points.  One in particular is that he is a member of the Road Runners Club of America Hall of Fame, which is criterion 10 in WP:NTRACK, specifically.  He qualifies by dint of his work on the fractional calculus, which is cited 100s of times, as well.  I request you withdraw the nomination.  Thank you! Skymath1 (talk) 08:52, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow, I am sorry! I thought those were two different articles! Looks like other editors caught onto that fortunately! Spyder212 (talk) 03:23, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Poulomi Saha
Greetings. Page Curation messed up--no AfD discussion page was created. Would you be so kind as to remedy this? Thanks. --Finngall talk 23:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know! Seems to have worked on this second attempt. Cheers, Spyder212 (talk) 04:08, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello ,



It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to and  who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to, , and who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
 * Year in review

has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
 * Reviewer of the Year

As a special recognition and thank you has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
 * NPP Technical Achievement Award

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Physician assistant: Mid-Level provider is not an appropriate term
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services removed that terminology years ago as it is insulting and degrading to the professions that provide advanced medical care.


 * Hi ! Thanks for your message on my talk page. Official term used by the WHO is mid-level provider. See here. Also left a message on your talk page. Spyder212 (talk) 15:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

You are wrong to refer to the PA profession as mid level provider. The WHO is also wrong. AAPA discusses it here please edit it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.0.137.98 (talk) 19:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)


 * OK, please keep your American marketing claims out of Wikipedia articles. As mentioned several times already, this issue has been discussed at length not only for PAs but also all other mid level providers, including NPs, CRNAs, etc. Read up on those discussions on the articles' talk pages before claiming some mid-level associations' statements are the only truth there is on this planet. Why is the term "mid-level provider" so degrading to the profession? WHO at least offers an international perspective of the profession and at least seems to describe their role adequately. If you wish, I could also pull out some statements by physician associations stating the exact opposite of your claims... But I don't think that would be time well spent. Spyder212 (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

It's not American marketing claim. It's the whole basis of our profession that was started and is being discussed in America and the professional organization that represents PAs. The centers for Medicare & Medicaid services also disagrees with you. Mid-level is inaccurate and degrading and you ask why. When you seek care do you want to think the profession entrusted with caring for you or your loved one is practicing middle level care? Obviously the answer is now. PAs practice exceptional quality care not middle level care. You are still wrong! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.0.137.98 (talk) 22:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)


 * You keep citing the same BS source from the AAPA... anything better than that? As I already mentioned, the article needs an international perspective- not just one based on American discussions and lobbying from your professional organization. In addition to the WHO definition above, I'll add the following, which interestingly shows that the US Justice Dept considers PAs as mid-level providers... See here and here. Spyder212 (talk) 23:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Moreover, I think you should stop editing this article. It seems as though you have an obvious conflict of interest. Spyder212 (talk) 23:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I think your argument of adding in "American marketing claims" also show your bias. As stated at the top of the wiki page "The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with North America and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate." Given that the PA profession was founded in the United States and is represented by the AAPA using the nomenclature put forth by them would be most appropriate. The correct title at the internationally recognized University Hospital I work for is appropriately "Advance Practice Provider". No reason to attempt to demean other professions because of your preference for your own.


 * I added the tag today actually. I think the lobbying efforts from the American professional organization (AAPA) should not be brought to Wikipedia. The article has been cleaned quite a few times in the past as well. As long as the World Health Organization describes PAs as mid level providers, Wikipedia should describe them as such. And even in the USA, the US Justice Dept formally describes PAs as mid level providers. You can see all the links above. What is it about PAs thinking everyone's trying to demean the profession? And no need for personal attacks and BS arguments. If all formal organizations are describing them as mid levels, with a few exceptions here and there, then coverage in Wikipedia should represent the general international perspective. By definition, a PA is a mid level provider. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. Spyder212 (talk) 00:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Your thoughts on this issue? I believe this was extensively discussed in the past on various mid-level pages including PA, NP, CRNA, etc. Spyder212 (talk) 00:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, AAPA doesn't like mid-level. AAPA also prefers 'PA' to 'Physician Assistant' for commonplace use, and is in the process of deciding whether or not to pursue a title change.  AAPA is a membership organization, and the de facto voice for the profession in the U.S.  Their opinions are worth mentioning, but not normative. That is, yes, note that they object to a term, but no, don't censor the fact that terms are disputed and various people and organizations differ on preferred terminology. Full disclosure: I am an AAPA constituent organization elected leader, so I can expect anyone in the professional staff or board of directors to actually read an email if I wrote one to them. Jclemens (talk) 18:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This comment is the one that caught my attention:
 * > do you want to think the profession entrusted with caring for you or your loved one is practicing middle level care?
 * My answer: Yes!  Why?  Because if I can be treated by a mid-level provider, it means that I'm not actually that sick, which, you know, is how I'd like my life to turn out.  I would like to be one of those boring patients that only needs routine care.  I do not ever want someone to feel obliged to tell me that I need the most advanced practitioner available.  If it's up to me, I want all of my future ailments to be comfortably within the scope of practice for a PA.  I don't want my healthcare providers to say things like "sorry, but it's bad, and you need to see an expert" or "your only hope is an experimental surgery, which a PA can't do because it's experimental, and the scope of practice for a PA is limited to procedures which they have explicitly been trained to do".  I want them to say boring things like "you have an upper respiratory infection, and you'll be fine in a few days". WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * And that is, in practice, what PAs do: we provide excellent care for the problems we're conversant on. While I agree that "mid-level" is an AMA-preferred term and pejorative against both PAs and NPs, that doesn't mean it's 1) not in use, or 2) so offensive it shouldn't ever be spoken in polite company. In my experience, PAs tend to provide more patient-centered care than MDs/DOs, because what most patients need is not a brain in a vat, but a compassionate, communicative generalist that most physicians in the U.S. are not, which is the fault of a system that trains them to see patients as problems instead of people and maximize profits, but that's another discussion... Jclemens (talk) 01:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This reminds me of some previous discussions. Every few years, we see new editors whose goal seems to be making it sound like there is no substantive difference between PAs or NPs, and physicians.  The conversations usually feel something like this:
 * "Can they legally perform complex heart surgeries on babies?"
 * "They can do anything they're specifically trained to do."
 * "But are any of them actually trained to do complex heart surgeries on babies?"
 * "Okay, so I'm guess that silence means that none of them are legally allowed to perform complex heart surgeries on babies, right?"
 * By contrast, at least in California, if you are a licensed physician, you are legally permitted to provide any form of healthcare, even if you're not trained on it (to the disgust of the acupuncturists, who unsuccessfully tried to stop the MDs from horning in on their market ~15 years ago). I think that if there were more willingness to admit the differences in the scope of practice, and less of this "anything at all, so long as we're trained (and I refuse to admit that we're trained on only a reasonable subset of 'anything')", it would be easier for us to write a description for the articles that was fair to all sides. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * By contrast, at least in California, if you are a licensed physician, you are legally permitted to provide any form of healthcare, even if you're not trained on it (to the disgust of the acupuncturists, who unsuccessfully tried to stop the MDs from horning in on their market ~15 years ago). I think that if there were more willingness to admit the differences in the scope of practice, and less of this "anything at all, so long as we're trained (and I refuse to admit that we're trained on only a reasonable subset of 'anything')", it would be easier for us to write a description for the articles that was fair to all sides. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Request for prototype testing
Hello there!

My name is AVardhana (WMF) (talk) 00:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC), and I recently joined The Wikimedia Foundation and am writing to invite you to participate in a user testing study that I'm currently conducting for The Wikipedia Library team. I noticed you've been an editor on Wikipedia so I thought I would reach out to see if you're interested in testing a prototype of the library's new Homepage?

This would involve my emailing you the prototype with a list of instructions and questions. The purpose of the study is to get a better understanding of what people think of the new Homepage design! If you're interested, please let me know here or feel free to email me at avardhana@wikimedia.org, and I'll be in touch via email! If you have any questions, I am happy to answer them.

Thank you, Aishwarya

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - April 2021
Ajpolino (talk) 02:24, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Navigation
Hallo, Thank you for creating David Wright (academic). When you create an article like this with a "disambiguated" title, please make sure that the reader can find it from the basic name (ie David Wright), by adding or expanding a hatnote, or adding the article to a disambiguation page. This helps the reader to find your article, and also reduces the chance of a future careless editor creating a duplicate article with a slightly different disambiguator. I've fixed this one. Thanks, and Happy Editing. Pam D  20:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Completely forgot this time! Thanks for catching that. Spyder212 (talk) 20:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted
Hi Spyder212. Your account has been added to the " " user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember: The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed,Rosguill talk 02:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging  pages for  maintenance so  that  they are aware.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
 * If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
 * While your track record was quite good overall, I do want to note that I think you made the wrong call at Battle of Tauroento, as I was unable to find any whiff of the subject in secondary sources. signed,Rosguill talk 02:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Medical Council of Canada
Hello, Spyder212, I am new to Wikipedia. The edits you continue to add on the Medical Council of Canada's page are NOT from a neutral point of view. That organization was created to protect the public and you are presenting the opinions of a few disgruntled residents as facts. I removed inflammatory language and statements to make the page more factual. WP:DISRUPT Why are you be the authority on this page and seeking to prevent other from adding facts? Isn't everyone entitled to contribute content? Do you have a vested interest in spreading editorial content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.120.224.181 (talk) 15:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

for your reference, here is an example of a page with a neutral point of view: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_College_of_Physicians_and_Surgeons_of_Canada


 * They're actually now facts running through the media as Canada's physicians and resident physicians are questioning the very existence of the MCC. Spyder212 (talk) 02:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - June 2021
Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Physician assistant
Can you believe that the same situation with that single editor is still going on after months? Dr. Vogel (talk) 11:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Not even surprised, unfortunately. American lobbying efforts are still taking place. Now they want to change their name to "physician associate" in order to further blur the lines between physicians and their midlevel profession. Just a matter of taking advantage of the general public as most have no clue in who's hands they are receiving care... As for the article, I reverted the changes, restoring to an earlier version, warned the user, and requested (again) page protection. Hopefully this helps. I will check the user's history and might ask for another block if it is the same user. Cheers, Spyder212 (talk) 12:15, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - July 2021
Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 19:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - August 2021
Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 02:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - September 2021
Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 20:24, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - September 2021
Thanks, Ajpolino (talk) 05:50, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our  Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but  there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software. Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia
Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny Associate Professor Hanyang University If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello ,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently Special:ListUsers/patroller New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello ,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000 at the end of May.
 * Backlog status

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
 * Backlog drive

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
 * TIP – New school articles

There is a new template available,, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
 * Misc

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
 * Notes

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022
Hello ,

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators and, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.
 * Backlog status

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.


 * Coordination: and  have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out.  will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.


 * Open letter to the WMF: The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.


 * TIP - Reviewing by subject: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.


 * New reviewers: The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message
Hi ,

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.
 * Invitation

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - August 2022
Ajpolino (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - October 2022
Ajpolino (talk) 03:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022
Hello , Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to ), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also. Software news: and  have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved. Suggestions:
 * There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
 * Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
 * Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
 * This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog: Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

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) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

UPE on Physician Assistant?
Hi, I'm looking to substantially clean up and rewrite Physician Assistant. You put a COI/UPE tag on that back in June 2021. Do you still see an issue where that needs to stay there? If not, what level of revision would it take for you to be happy with me taking that off? Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 01:52, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023
Hello , The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day. won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!
 * Backlog
 * 2022 Awards

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from  to  '''

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as and  have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Med Newsletter - Issue 21
Ajpolino (talk) 04:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023
Hello , Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by  and  with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of, and also some patches from , has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and on IRC.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New pages patrol needs your help!
Hello , The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by using  at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter
Hello ,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive
 Hello Spyder212:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!

The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello ,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikiproject Medicine May 2024 Newsletter

 * Issue 22&mdash;May 2024


 * WikiProject Medicine Newsletter

Hello all. Another irregular edition of the newsletter. I was inspired to collect this after seeing several medicine-interested editors nominate their first good article. Please review a GA nomination if you have time, and help support our colleagues' efforts:

WP:MED News
 * Good article reassessment is back in business, with a new process and new coordinators. If you see medicine-related GAs that may no longer meet the GA criteria, feel free to nominate them for attention/reassessment (please, not too many at once, lest we get overwhelmed). I'll incorporate them into the listings above.
 * Maintenance category of the month: Articles with topics of unclear notability (I've listed just the 36 that start with "A"; there are 398 total).
 * Note for the curious: 24,211 of the 57,554 articles (42%) tagged as part of WP:MED have some maintenance tag.

Newsletter ideas, comments, and criticisms welcome here.

You are receiving this because you added your name to the WikiProject Medicine mailing list. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine at 21:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC).