User talk:TylerDurden8823/Archive 2

Guild of Copy Editors February 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Acne vulgaris/archive2
That was a tough FAC; but, look how much better the article is from when you first started! Thank you for working on such an important topic. Next time you send it up for an FAC please email me and I will post a review again. Once it becomes a FA you are going to have such a huge sense of satisfaction. --My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 13:56, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Core, but I don't think I'll be resubmitting the article. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 15:39, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I was looking forward to a renomination. It is an important article. It is worth FA status. So what if it was closed. Happened to me (Lead, Metalloid); happens to other people. Get up and have another go. The objective is to get to the mountain and enjoy the view, never mind the jungle, swamp, and piranha-filled river you have to cross. I have my own projects, articles and RL obligations but am willing to help when I can. At least the pressure is off---I find it a more enjoyable to do editing after an FAC has been closed, rather than during it. Other editors are available to help. Sandbh (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not looking forward to it and I will not be renominating it. I refuse to work with the folks at FAC ever again. I would be willing to work with you again, Sand, but not with most of the others. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 13:34, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

I thought your most recent acne edits were very good! --My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 06:46, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Acne listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Acne. Since you had some involvement with the Acne redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Not interested, you can have the conversation without me. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 00:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

WP:MEDMOS
Per MEDMOS we tend to reference the leads for medical articles. Did someone suggest they be removed? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:22, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, Sandbh repeatedly requested this on the FAC and talk page stating that it's not typical for FAs to have refs in the lead (though I've seen multiple FAs do this). No one objected when this point was raised multiple times. It doesn't matter to me. If the community feels differently, feel free to rollback the changes I made. It probably warrants further discussion on the talk page but I was being bold. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * MEDMOS actually says "Adding sources to the lead is a reasonable practice but not required", which is not exactly as strong as "we tend to do this". However, because acne is so common, IMO this would be a particularly useful article for the translators to take on, and translators sometimes only translate the lead, so I'd support including them.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:20, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's okay with me. I recommend talking about it on the article talk page so everyone is on the same page. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 05:22, 15 March 2017 (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 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Copper
Hello Tyler: You said - ''Is there a reason none of the USDA nutrition tables I'm looking at on various food pages display their copper content? I realize it's a micronutrient that doesn't get the spotlight as often as some of the others but it is still considered an essential micronutrient and deserves mention. Do you have any thoughts about this?'' Frankly, I don't know why it's not included in the standard WP nutrition template and have always assumed there's a template error prohibiting it to be displayed. Now I feel guilty about not pursuing this. To show the error, I edited the two tables for kiwi that you worked on today, using the alternate "opt-in" code (which works for everything else), but copper still doesn't display, indicating there is coding that prevents it from being shown. Perhaps a request to WP admin about this should be raised. Here's the NAS review discussing copper as an essential nutrient. Let me know if you need further input or support. --Zefr (talk) 14:18, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Nutrition and MEDRS
Could you give your thoughts about this, please? The editor is debating whether nutrition is governed by MEDRS. I looked through dozens of WT:MED archives and didn't find a specific discussion supporting nutrition as a MEDRS topic, although we all know it does. Issues I raised (or would raise) included:
 * 1) the lede sentence mentions "maintenance, growth, reproduction, health and disease of an organism", which collectively imply MEDRS
 * 2) last lede paragraph mentions numerous diseases which result if nutrition is poor or absent, implying MEDRS
 * 3) DRIs are based on diseases which develop if a specific nutrient is absent, demonstrating MEDRS
 * 4) the other editor objected when I removed an opinion article which she wanted to use for a lede statement that the nutrition field is only "half-understood" by nutritionists and poorly understood by the public. I can agree to both assumptions, but the NYT article is a survey and opinion, not a MEDRS-quality review.

Or do you feel there would be value in raising this with the community at WT:MED? Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 14:42, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Vitiligo
I don't get it - talk to who, you or the other guy? where? There is need to show there is another theory even if not yet proved or disproved — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soaringbear (talk • contribs) 18:18, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, you can talk to me, James, and all other Wikipedia contributors about the changes to the article you're proposing on the vitiligo article's talk page. At the top of the article you'll see a button that you can click where it says "talk". If you go to that page, click new section, and state what change you would like to make to the article, based on what source(s), and why, that will get things rolling. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:45, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Undoing is just a click, but, just before, take the time to read the initial (and returned) article's paragraph: Does it make sense as it is written? Is NALP1 the correct name? Has it been introduced elsewhere in the article? Is something widely known? And where are the sources connecting it to the caspases? Are these the correct caspases? Maybe the sentence you deleted included sources? (Anyway, it is just a sentence..) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.55.35.230 (talk) 19:47, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, 5! Yes, I did read your edit before I undid your edit with a click and I have read the original paragraph. You added a sentence about NALP1 so I'm really not sure why you're doubting that (it is mentioned elsewhere in the article already under the subsection "autoimmune associations"). The sentence I deleted did include a source (as mentioned in my edit summary) but it was a primary source (not a secondary source as preferred (see WP:MEDRS) such as a literature review or systematic review/meta-analysis). If you can find a high-quality secondary source to support the content you wish to add, then please feel free to do so. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:03, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 5 here! Thank you. If you also read the reference, you would see that, what i wrote, is there noted as "reference" (other people's work that is). Therefore my reference is a secondary source, some people that agree with the result and take it further. The term NALP1 is first time used in the autoimmune section, as you agree, and someone has to say at least that this is a gene. That is why i inserted an intro of some words there. Also, people and wikipedia are not using the term NALP1, but the term  NLRP1. Anyway, please feel free to delete all my above comments.
 * Hi 5, please reread the autoimmune section. I clearly see a place where it says "NALP1". Additionally, the issue wasn't so much what you wrote but the supporting reference you chose. Per WP:MEDRS, secondary sources (e.g., literature reviews or systematic reviews/meta-analyses) are strongly preferred (if you need any help with proper formatting of a secondary reference, please let me know). This is the article you selected and it is a primary reference/original investigation; it is not a literature review. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:35, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Rudy Moise
Hi TylerDurden8823, I’ve noticed that you made a few useful edits to this article around the same time of last year and was wondering if you would care to offer your thoughts in its AfD? Thank you kindly. Savvyjack23 (talk)

The Signpost: 24 November 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 24 November 2017 (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!

ANI Experiences survey
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:


 * https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.


 * Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry X-mas

 * Thank you, James! Happy holidays to you as well! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 21:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 February 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

GOCE February 2018 news
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
...for all your improvements to the Vaginal tumors article. I am taking a pause in its improvement and you more than welcome to continue to edit it. I am not certain at this point if other editors have ceased editing it, but my proposed future improvements would be: Of course I don't expect you to make these changes, I just wanted to let you know what I think some of the improvements could be. Best Regards, Barbara ✐ ✉  01:28, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * alphabetizing the entries
 * filling in more epidemiological information
 * there even more tumors than are listed here and I would like to include them some time in the future.

Reactive arthritis
Thank you for the copyedit. I was unaware Reiter was a Nazi. I would have assumed that The Guardian of all sources would have used the most correct term, but then again they were quoting Mr Walters who was diagnosed over 20 years ago. Harambe Walks (talk) 01:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Harambe, you're welcome. Many people are unaware of Reiter's dark history and that's why I wanted to make sure it was clear. I am also somewhat surprised at The Guardian, but as you said, it was over 20 years ago and although there were calls to change the syndrome's name at that time, it wasn't yet a well-accepted change. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

How to deal with the GPA page?
You seem to be on my side in the discussion of GPA, "formerly known as Wegener's" vs "also known as"; as a more-experienced wikipedian, how do you think we should proceed with the GPA page? Myoglobin (talk) 15:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, Myoglobin. If the 2001 editor (I have no idea whether that's Nature or an independent editor who agrees with them and I'll refrain from speculating) continues to try to edit war their proposed change in, then yes, it would be worth mentioning this to an administrator since it's not acceptable editorial behavior. It's unacceptable conduct to edit war this material in after repeated explanations in edit summaries since the current language was the accepted for years and their bold edit was reverted per WP:BRD. They should prove community consensus before trying to put the change in. Personally, I think the change is nonsense. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick reply. Are you saying that we should do nothing and wait for consensus?  It seems that the only editors agreeing with Natureium are unregistered; how does consensus policy deal with that situation? Myoglobin (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Since you just opened the RFC, I would give it a bit of time. I do find it suspect that the only editors on Nature's side of the issue are unregistered. If they continue to edit war the material in during the RFC, then we will have to escalate this but I suggest raising the issue on the Wikipedia Wikiproject Medicine page to solicit other opinions if you're truly interested in seeing what the community consensus is for this RFC. If you would like assistance doing this, please let me know and I can help you. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:10, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll give it a week and then decide what to do based on the RFC results (if there are any). Do I need to re-explain the argument for "formerly" within the RFC, or am I not allowed to comment as the one who started the RFC? Myoglobin (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It's usually good practice to summarize the issue when initiating an RFC. I have pinged several other Wikipedia editors who were involved in the last discussion of this topic five years ago to see if they will weigh in. You are certainly allowed to comment on the RFC even if you started the RFC. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:31, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It's been a while since the last comment on the GPA talk page; should I remove the RFC? Myoglobin (talk) 20:14, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Myoglobin, I've been a bit busy in real life so I haven't had time to respond until now. I wouldn't remove the RFC just yet but I think it's nearing the end since the conversation isn't really going anywhere and I don't think 2001's proposed change has been supported by any clear demonstrable consensus and it should remain as is. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:24, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps remove the RFC in about a week? Myoglobin (talk) 13:28, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * , I think it's time to close the RFC. There's no further progress in the discussion with the single IP user. The difference in opinion is irreconcilable but they have not proven consensus for their proposed change to overturn well-sourced language/information. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2018 (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 03:01, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Ref says
"Treatment of nephrogenic diabetes insipidus includes removal of precipitating drugs (if possible) and sometimes initiation of thiazide diuretics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or both."

Does not mention that correcting hypercalcemia will correct the hypernatremia due to nephrogenic DI. Can you provide a ref for that? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, standby for more info... TylerDurden8823 (talk) 23:56, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-) Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 23:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 June 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Ref
Which ref supports this ? Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 10:42, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * My access to PubMed articles is very limited at the moment. MKSAP mentioned this and had a citation to a series in the International Journal of the AIDS Society. (supports new diagnosis of psoriasis as a marker for new HIV infection). This older article supports this statement  and this newer review article . If you want to modify it, that's fine since my access is currently limited. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for fixing my changes on the Barrett's Esophagus! I'm still getting used to the markup and references are particularly complex!

Most, most, most appreciated.

Best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.128.45 (talk) 13:25, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! =) TylerDurden8823 (talk) 14:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

August GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, James! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 00:11, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Polymorphism (biology)
This could use your copyediting expertise, if you are interested. So much work to do, all the time! Jytdog (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:53, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Sean Conley
Hi TylerDurden8823 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physician_to_the_President Here is a Reference I just found for Sean Conley https://thedo.osteopathic.org/2018/05/navy-veteran-do-is-serving-as-president-donald-trumps-physician/ If you can read it and help me add Acting on his page and the Physician to the President page that would be great. Thanks and I look forward for your responce.96.36.68.29 (talk) 16:58, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Cranial electrotherapy stimulation
Hi,

Could you please advise why you changed this article? Please provide reasons. The article still appears very opinionated and vague at the same time.

Regards,

JM Jeanmb1 (talk) 10:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Jean, the only edit I made was the inclusion of a few wikilinks to make the reading experience easier for readers. I did not alter any of the content and I did include a brief edit summary (WL is an abbreviation for wikilink). Have a great day! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 15:23, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Inquiry from a Public Relations Representative for electroCore on Updating Wikipedia Articles
Hello TylerDurden8823,

My name is Matt Nemet and I am a Public Relations professional at GCI Health, a firm specializing in healthcare. One of our clients, electroCore (a commercial-stage bioelectronic medicine company), has expressed interest in increasing patient awareness on vagus nerve stimulation as a treatment for headaches, and views Wikipedia as a valuable outlet to focus on as they market gammaCore Sapphire (a non-invasive vagus nerve stimulator). The company’s current focus is in multiple conditions, including cluster headache and migraine.

In 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released gammaCore for the acute treatment of pain associated with episodic cluster headache in adult patients, and this year, the FDA cleared gammaCore for the acute treatment of pain associated with migraine headache in adult patients. However, we would also like to bring to your attention a recent review of cervical vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of primary headache disorders, published in the Journal of Pain Research on August 27th.

We know that Wikipedia users depend on active and reputable editors for reliable content. We also felt that given your previous efforts editing Wikipedia pages on cluster headache and migraine, you might be interested in considering this review to include up-to-date information on vagus nerve stimulation and/or gammaCore on relevant Wikipedia pages, such as vagus nerve stimulation for example.

We want to be upfront in our awareness that, per Wikipedia guidelines, neither the company nor those directly associated with the company can make such edits. It is an important set of rules and guidelines that we respect, as our priority is ensuring Wikipedia has the most current and relevant information possible. Therefore, we are reaching out, if you are willing to assess the value of the proposed information to make accurate and appropriate updates.

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Best regards, MSN2017 (talk) 12:53, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

ACP
See American College of Pediatricians - AAP is indeed reliable (but arguably not a valid primary source per WP:UNDUE), however, this content gave parity to the American College of Pediatricians, a fringe group. Guy (Help!) 19:18, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree about the ACP. Guy, you threw out the baby with the bathwater with that edit. Those sources were added years ago. I have no issue with removing the ACP part but there was a separate reference from the actual AAP rather than the ACP that was removed with it. Please be more specific with your edit summaries in the future; it was unclear from "primary source" since that's what was said so it made things unclear. I have fixed it. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 19:40, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:48, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
Thanks again :-) --  Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

GOCE 2018 Annual Report
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

March GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 March 2019
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia <div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 15:42, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * From the editors: Getting serious about humor
 * News and notes: Blackouts fail to stop EU Copyright Directive
 * In the media: Women's history month
 * Discussion report: Portal debates continue, Prespa agreement aftermath, WMF seeks a rebranding
 * Featured content: Out of this world
 * Arbitration report: The Tides of March at ARBCOM
 * Traffic report: Exultations and tribulations
 * Technology report: New section suggestions and sitewide styles
 * News from the WMF: The WMF's take on the new EU Copyright Directive
 * Recent research: Barnstar-like awards increase new editor retention
 * From the archives: Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
 * Humour: The Epistolary of Arthur 37
 * Op-Ed: Pro and Con: Has gun violence been improperly excluded from gun articles?
 * In focus: The Wikipedia SourceWatch
 * Special report: Wiki Loves (50 Years of) Pride
 * Community view: Wikipedia's response to the New Zealand mosque shootings

The Signpost: 30 April 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * I didn't actually undo it. I self-reverted. I just accidentally clicked rollback by mistake. Mouse problems. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:57, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions Alert
--Guy Macon (talk) 00:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)


 * (Zero issues with your edits. I am just hitting everyone on the Jenny McCarthy page that hasn't received a pseudoscience and fringe science discretionary sanctions alert in the last year) --Guy Macon (talk) 00:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Noted, thank you for clarifying, Guy! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

CMTBard
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement --Guy Macon (talk) 17:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Gout, and others
Thanks for tidying my edits - my wiki markup learning continues! The article about gout has got quite a few issues, not least ancient references of, in some cases, dubious quality. I'm going to update them with some more robust and current ones. Some of the content is poor quality and the structure repetitious ('diagnosis' seems to appear twice, for instance), so I'll have a look at this too when times allows. Thanks Fortnum (talk) 06:20, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Response
--Guy Macon (talk) 04:33, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Describing the qualifications of Stamets
Could you review and comment on this RfC, please? Many thanks. --Zefr (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Revision Coenzyme Q10
Thank you for your Revision of Coenzyme Q10 as of 04:42, 14 October 2019, where you Undid revision 921138753 by me of the paragraph in the article, Coenzyme Q10, that read, "In the Free radical research article titled Coenzyme Q10: absorption, tissue uptake, metabolism and pharmacokinetics the authors opined that "CoQ10 has a fundamental role in cellular bioenergetics" that "CoQ10 is also an important antioxidant" and that "Animal data show that CoQ10 in large doses is taken up by all tissues including heart and brain mitochondria. This has implications for therapeutic applications in human diseases, and there is evidence for its beneficial effect in cardiovascular and neurodegenerative diseases."
 * I was wondering (1) how was the article Inadequately sourced as it was publish in US National Library of Medicine - National Institutes of Health - National Center for Biotechnology Information (maybe because it was from the Free Radical Res Journal and it is not a good source?), (2) how would it help to take it to talk if it is flawed?


 * When you have a chance: What do you think of these studies (a) https://www.pharmanord.com/history-coenzyme-Q10-research (Pharma Nord), (b) https://ubiquinol.org/clinical-studies, (c) http://pennstatehershey.adam.com/content.aspx?productid=107&pid=33&gid=000295 (Kaneka North America LLC), (d) https://openheart.bmj.com/content/2/1/e000326 (Cited by 42 · Related articles)(BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & British Cardiovascular Society), (e) http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/pharmacy/currentstudents/OnCampusPharmDStudents/ExperientialProgram/Documents/nutr_monographs/Monograph-coenzyme_q10.pdf (Natural Medicines comprehensive database. Goldenseal monograph/U.C. Denver), (f) https://www.nature.com/articles/1002138 (Journal of Human Hypertension), (g) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5807419/#!po=1.06383 (Frontiers in Physiology), (g) https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements-coenzyme-q10/art-20362602 (Mayo Clinic)


 * I agree the use of CoQ10 is still to some/great extent in the research stage, but there does seem to show its usefulness i) such as in a randomized trial of 20 children treated for acute lymphoblastic leukemia or non-Hodgkin lymphoma where the results reported that CoQ10 decreased the harmful effects of doxorubicin on the heart (National Cancer Institute); ii) such as CoQ10 supporting heart health (Published Research-Kaneka North America LLC); iii) such as CoQ10 being a powerful antioxidant that fight free radicals, which radicals damage cell membranes, tamper with DNA, and even cause cell death, with researchers believing free radicals contribute to the aging process, as well as a number of health problems, including heart disease and cancer; iv) such as clinical studies showing that people who took daily CoQ10 supplements within 3 days of a heart attack were less likely to have subsequent heart attacks and chest pain (Penn State Hershey Medical Center); v) though perhaps needing more study, such a meta-analysis showed that, compared to HF patients in the placebo group, patients treated with CoQ10 achieved a better ejection fraction, stroke volume, cardiac output, cardiac index and end diastolic volume index (BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & British Cardiovascular Society); vi) such that CoQ10 Q10 (doses of 100-200mg/day) have favorable effects when taken with heart failure drugs, that it can provide rapid protective effects in patients with AMI if administered within 3 days of the onset of symptoms, vii) such that high doses appear to slow the progressive deterioration of function in early Parkinson’s Disease when compared to placebo, etc. (Jonathan Reilly, U.C. Denver, Natural Medicines comprehensive database. Goldenseal monograph); viii) such as causing lower diastolic and systolic blood pressures (Journal of Human Hypertension); ix) such, at least, that deficiency in CoQ10 and its associated antioxidative activity can significantly increase the level of oxidative damage, so  seems clear that supplementation with CoQ10 improves mitochondrial function and confers antioxidant protection for organs and tissues affected by various pathophysiological conditions, and the ability of CoQ10 to protect against the release of proinflammatory markers provides an attractive anti-inflammatory therapeutic for the treatment of some human diseases and in aging (Frontiers in Physiology)
 * This topic is beyond my expertise and time allotment, so please don’t involve me with an extensive discussion — you seem better equipped to modify the Coenzyme Q10 article as you see fit. I hope the additional information helps. Best regards Quaerens-veritatem (talk) 08:15, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

GAN for Fibrothorax
Hello! So, that absentee nominator who nominated Chylothorax also put up Fibrothorax for GA; I've reviewed it, but, again, no response from the nominator. If you'd be interested in saving the day again, I'd be glad to work with you a second time—but you're certainly under no obligation to do so! I just wanted to extend the invitation, since you were so helpful on the previous review. Either way, thanks! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 14:05, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'm happy to take a look and see if I can rescue it! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 08:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert: pseudoscience and fringe science.
(Alerting all recent editors of our Multiple chemical sensitivity article.)

--Guy Macon (talk) 08:54, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

HIV/AIDS denialism
I have reverted the edit back to "medications" - I agree with your interpretation. Considering reporting this user... this is not typical civil behavior on Wikipedia... Your thoughts? Spyder212 (talk) 03:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. Thank you for reaching out and for helping with the HIV/AIDS denialism article. I've never seen someone object so vociferously over a relatively minor detail. It reeked of WP:OWNERSHIP issues. Yeesh. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 03:27, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There have been similar WP:OWNERSHIP issues before. See Talk:Hagarism and here. 2601:243:2200:60E:6160:C50C:98AD:AE31 (talk) 16:59, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Peace Dove
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ― Buster7  &#9742;   14:13, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Kidney vs renal
Why pick that particular word to change? I mean, you are content with "azotemia" and "pyometra," but "renal" is the final straw? You'd have to literally rewrite the entire article to eliminate medical jargon, and "renal" is not really jargon- it's a pretty common term, and was already defined in the article. If a person goes to a vet, that vet is going to say renal, not kidney. So having consistency is not a bad thing. This really isn't that deep, but just a weird hill to die on. MarialeegRVT (talk) 17:29, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Renal is definitely medical jargon. I can tell you from real-life experience that numerous lay people have no idea what that means. I never said I'm okay with "azotemia" or pyometra". This is just what I'm focusing on currently on this particular pass. I'm not combing every single article for all medical jargon currently (though historically I have done a lot of that as well). This is just low-hanging fruit to fix along with hepatic for liver, etc. I will certainly continue to remove medical jargon in the future, but this particular jargon issue is very widespread on Wikipedia. There are others I have corrected too. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:13, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bipolar disorder
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bipolar disorder you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ajpolino -- Ajpolino (talk) 16:20, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Reiki dispute resolution

 * == Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion ==

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the noticeboard regarding NIH definition. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Needs Work".The discussion is about the topic Reiki. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Pamxz (talk) 22:42, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 1 March 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)

Papers for Bipolar Disorder
Hello! Per your request at WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Resource_Request, I emailed you through Special:EmailUser, but I don't think I can attach documents through that form. That form-generated email should have my regular email address attached to it, so if you respond to that email I can attach the PDFs for you. Alternatively, you can just email me through Special:EmailUser and I'll respond with the articles you requested (or if you have some alternative method you prefer, just let me know). Does that make sense? Ajpolino (talk) 20:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Whoops! Sorry your reply had been sent to my spam. Just saw it. Ajpolino (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bipolar disorder
The article Bipolar disorder you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bipolar disorder for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ajpolino -- Ajpolino (talk) 06:41, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If you've got the time and interest, Good_article_nominations is severely backlogged and could use experienced editors willing to undertake thorough reviews. As you just saw, in the current setup, by the time the nominations get reviewed, the nominators are working on other articles (or worse, no longer editing!) and answering the reviews is much more of a hassle than it would be had the review been timely. As a case in point, I've got a review open now where the nominator hasn't edited in 3 months. If you know of someone interested in the topic, let me know and I'll ping them there to see if they're interested in helping out. All that said, if you don't have time for reviews because you're improving other articles, then you're probably spending your time just fine. I hope all is well! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 16:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm happy to work on NAFLD within the next few days. Personally, I've never reviewed an article before. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 05:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Great! Well if you'd like to review an article, instructions are here. You review against the good article criteria, which are open to some interpretation. They have some templates to help organize your review, but as you saw at the bipolar disorder review, some of the templates have obnoxious numbering schemes. I've started using User:Ajpolino/GAreview which is more straightforward to edit. You're welcome to do whatever you find convenient. Two pieces of unsolicited wisdom I've picked up through the few GA reviews I've done: (1) the GA instructions suggest you leave your review open for a week. I'd suggest you ignore that and be flexible with the nominator's time. Especially with these older nominations, the nominator may now be busy in real life. No rush. (2) It's hard sometimes to see the line between the GA criteria (a well-written article free of major flaws, that covers the topic broadly) and the FA criteria (a professional-quality article, that covers the topic comprehensively). But try to keep in mind that GAs don't have to be perfect. The GA process is intended to be a lightweight review process.
 * All that said, reviewing GAs can be a nice way to help others improve the encyclopedia. But if you'd rather spend your time improving articles, that's ok too. Volunteer project; do whatever brings you fulfillment. Thanks for volunteering to look at the NAFLD article. I should have a chance to put more attention towards it next week. Until then, happy editing. Ajpolino (talk) 15:44, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color:#E6E6FA; border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em auto; padding: 0.5em; width:90%; text-align: center"> Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Million Award for Bipolar disorder
Thank-you for your many contributions to improve this vital article! – Reidgreg (talk) 12:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020 - Robert F. Kennedy Jr. page
Hello, you left this message for me: Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions on Robert F. Kennedy Jr. did not appear constructive and has been reverted. ... If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC) The contribution that I made noted Kennedy's stated position on vaccines - quoting him denying the anti-vaccine accusation and that he argues for safer immunizations. These have cited references. He has stated many times in public that he has vaccinated his own children. My question to you is why somebody can stand accused in Wikipedia, yet cited material that refutes the accusation is not allowed to stand? You wrote in your Edit Summary: "No, he is not merely accused of being anti-vaccine. He IS anti-vaccine. There's no debate about this." I argue that his public statements that he is not anti-vaccine must be allowed on his Wikipedia page. Marker4545 (talk) 01:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Some of the sources you were using were too weak and you inappropriately softened the language in the lead from he is anti-vaccine to he is accused of being anti-vaccine. That's a significant difference. The latter indicates he may not be anti-vaccine, which is demonstrably false. It is obvious and widely accepted, to everyone except those in the anti-vaccine community, that he is indeed anti-vaccine. It is a common antivaxxer trope to deny being anti-vaccine and try to whitewash it as being "pro safe-vaccine". It's nonsense. I don't have a problem with adding that he denies these accusations, but it must be balanced by saying that the mainstream experts disagree. There are numerous strong sources that show he is absolutely anti-vaccine. We must reflect that he is what he actually is and not inappropriately soften the language to make him sound like a martyr or victim, which he most certainly is not. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your reply. There are stronger and more solid references where Kennedy clearly stresses his support for vaccines. But I'd like to ask for clarity on your comment before posting again on his page. For a denial with strong citations to be accepted, you noted that one would also have to add that mainstream experts disagree with Kennedy. This makes no sense since the purpose of posting the denial is to balance out the already existing accusations that he is a "prominent anti-vaccine activist." Marker4545 (talk) 03:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that adding his denial does not conform with WP:NPOV and is not balanced. Jenny McCarthy denies being anti-vaccine too, but that's plainly false. That's the major problem. Kennedy going around saying he supports "pro-safe vaccines" is not the same thing as supporting vaccines. It's a very common and well-established anti-vaccine/vaccine-hesitant trope. Also, the onus is on those who introduce new material to justify its inclusion, not the other way around. You would need to obtain consensus on the article's talk page to see if there is agreement in the community about adding that. I doubt it though, but you're welcome to try and make your case for adding it to the article. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 03:29, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

"Properly ordered refs"?
Hi there, quick question for you: I see at Chagas disease you've made several edits swapping the order of references at the end of a sentence with the edit summary "Properly ordered refs." What is the goal of the ref swapping? To move the footnote superscripts into numerical order? Typically if I have a sentence with facts X and Y, I end it with <reference for X><reference for Y> (i.e. I put my references in the order of the statements they reference). I hope that's easier for the reader to follow? But truly I have no evidence of this, and my order may be completely non-intuitive to any reader. Is there some established guidance on ordering the reference? If so, I could be more careful of it going forward; I don't need to generate more work for someone down the line... I hope all is well. Glad to see all the work at NAFLD; I'll get a chance to take a look through it in the next few days. Ajpolino (talk) 01:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It's so the citations in the text are in the proper order. It just looks strange when it says [10][2] instead of [2][10]. I'm confident that is the general convention. I've never seen a professional paper do it any other way before. The citations in every article occur in order from when they first occur in the article. I think it also just looks aesthetically better when the numbers are in order. I don't think people will know that the references are purposefully out of numerical order to correspond with the order of facts within a sentence. I don't think that's common. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:33, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Thanks, Robin! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 09:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Vaccine revert "onus"
Hi Tyler,

I actually already started talking in the talk page and someone removed what I said from there, so I had to undo that as well. So your removal of my material is what I would consider to be vandalism, since you didn't first talk to me about your objection. I hope you will not be banned. Regarding onus, if what you say is correct, then I can simply remove all the content on the page that has not been discussed in the talk page first, since the onus is on the person who added it. Correct?
 * Yes, I removed what you put on there (as summarized in the edit summary) because it did not follow Wikipedia rules and guidelines. The talk page is specifically for addressing a proposed revision to the article and is not a forum to attempt to put down organizations like the AMA, CDC, etc. It is really meant to be a place where you say something like "I think we should add ____ because...". If you start a new discussion like that, I would have no objection as long as there are no violations of WP:SOAPBOX, WP:TPG, etc. My removal of what you put on the talk page is certainly not vandalism. I recommend you read WP:Vandalism to familiarize yourself with how that is defined on Wikipedia. And no, you cannot simply wipe the slate clean since the page you're referring to has ample amounts of stable information that is supported by high-quality references. So no, your suggestion is incorrect. That would be considered vandalism and is inappropriate. Also, please be sure to sign your comments with four consecutive ~ marks after you're finished. It's considered good form here. Good luck. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 19:14, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey I got a ping because Jzg was on my watchlist. I'd like to revert the edit on the talk page and go over his the 3-4 sources and explain why we shouldn't use the sources he cites. I know it technically violates "soapbox" rules but I think it would be useful enngage to with him and explain why they shouldn't. Note i'm talking the talk page edits, not his actual edits, and if you think that wouldn't productive or he wouldn't engage constructively then I'll move on. It just when he claims censorship, which it isn't because he obviously violated rules concerning the talk page, I thinks it better to explain why the sources shouldn't be used, thanks - --Kwwhit5531 (talk) 21:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It's already been addressed on his/her own talk page. But, if you would like to put it back and discuss it there despite the SOAP violation for the sake of posterity for anyone else who may suggest those sources for the article in the future, I have no personal objection to that. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've already found some info that discusses some of the papers he mentions and the various problems with them. When I get back from work tonight I'll look up up the rest of the papers. Then I'll revert the edit, address the linked papers, and explain the importance of the soap violation. I didn't reverts it without asking you first since its a legitimate revert, but I thought it would be good idea to respond to his sources, since they come largely from or were sponsored by legitimate health organizations, but I want to explain how scientific articles are not gospel but need to reproducible, use valid research methods, etc and why those do not. Thanks. --Kwwhit5531 (talk) 23:48, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, I appreciate your reaching out and the courtesy. Thank you! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 23:53, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Alright I reverted it and responded to him. --Kwwhit5531 (talk) 02:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , and you got a rather nonsensical rambling answer from what appears to (most likely) be a sock. I am Jack's complete lack of surprise. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well it was worth a try, but its pretty obvious he didn't even bother to read the link to the abstract of the paper he was citing as the reason for his edit: "Routine vaccination has dramatically decreased the incidence of many serious diseases, and new vaccines are becoming available to improve the quality of health care. Vaccination programs are a cornerstone of modern public health, and are of central importance in preparedness for dealing with potential health emergencies, such as the recurrence of pandemic influenza.". While he was right that Harvard and Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare Inc. is a collaboration, it is not a collaboration with Harvard Medical School, but the larger university, it's basically an HMO, "is a not-for-profit health services company", like Blue Cross Blue Shield. Ah well at least now he can't say we censored his reliable source (it was real medical article just doesn't say what he thinks), we responded to it and I can copy-paste that response to the next guy asking why he got his edit reverted. Thanks for let me trying though. --Kwwhit5531 (talk) 05:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Still tweaking it
Still tweaking that sentence. David notMD (talk) 22:09, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What sentence? TylerDurden8823 (talk) 22:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Yeah, what sentence?
 * Shadowblade08 (talk) 22:12, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Second sentence of second paragraph of Lead. I am done, but if you believe I have made it worse, revert to before my first change. David notMD (talk) 22:13, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't change it...I'm lost, David. What are you talking about exactly? If you're referring to the NAFLD article, the only changes I just made were removing a few redundant wikilinks and adding obesity to the infobox. It's not my article, there are no WP:OWNERSHIP issues here so I'm not sure why you're asking for permission. I have no qualms with the adjustments you made. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 22:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * TylerDurden8823 - You recently raised the article to GA. I think what I did improved the text in the Lead, but as you are the expert I was just doing a courtesy of letting you know about what I did. David notMD (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, well that's very nice. I'm not accustomed to people doing that but thank you. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I am doing some editing while considering reviewing the DYK. A suggestion: the second gallery (CT, etc.) doesn't do much for the article. Consider removing first, second and fourth, and make the remaining one a left-justified thumb. David notMD (talk) 00:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, I don't see why not. I didn't add that but I don't feel strongly about keeping it. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I reviewed and approved the Did You Know. What happens next is that it goes to the nominated approved list, and then at some time in the future - can be weeks - a DYK reviewer moves it to the Prep list, and from there to Queue, and then main page for 24 hours. Always possible that the reviewer may ask for some article revisions even though I approved it. The article currently averages ~600 views a day. On the DYK day that can be expected to get a bump into the thousands. Please share this with your co-conspirator. David notMD (talk) 19:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I'll make sure to mention it to Signimu though I haven't seen them edit much lately. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 19:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Your DYK count
I took "I've never done a DYK before as above." to mean this was your first DYK, but in looking back at your Talk page, I see several mentioned. So, counting this one, are you at no more than five? Otherwise, you do owe a QPQ for this one. David notMD (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I have never nominated a DYK before, David. Where exactly are you seeing several mentioned? The only other mention of DYK on my talk page that I see is Ajpolino mentioning that bipolar disorder is eligible for it after I got it promoted to GA (I never nominated it for it). TylerDurden8823 (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying that. My assumption (mistaken), was that you would have submitted a DYK after each GA, because that is what I have done. David notMD (talk) 01:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't really know about DYK for past articles so I never did it before. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 01:31, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Remdesivir - Side Effects
Hi TylerDurden8823, just letting you know that I have left a detailed update in the Remdesivir Talk page, as to the answer I received from the corresponding author of the article we discussed a few days ago (Re: the unexplained double caveat against the combination of Rendesivir and Chloroquine/Hydroxychloroquine). In retrospect, I'm not sure it was worth the trouble, but maybe you should have a look. Cheers. Michal.188.64.206.71 (talk) 22:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Advert flag for Western University of Health Sciences
Hi TylerDurden8823, you recently edited this article, which was appropriately tagged by another user with an advert flag. I did a bunch of cleanup and removed the tag; I think it's much better now. I would encourage you to have a look and share your thoughts. Thanks! Rytyho usa (talk) 00:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
— Wug·a·po·des​ 19:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC) 12:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

GOCE June newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:47, 5 June 2020 (UTC).

Doxycycline and IBD/UC/CD
I noticed you made this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ulcerative_colitis&curid=63531&diff=961185858&oldid=961184577

Do you have similar concerns about these edits?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crohn%27s_disease&curid=63522&diff=961183648&oldid=961017242

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Doxycycline&curid=660870&diff=961181910&oldid=957750502

Whywhenwhohow (talk) 03:04, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, somewhat. They did add a secondary source unlike in the UC article though it's not PubMed/MEDLINE-indexed and that gives me some pause about its reliability. I haven't had time to do a deep dive on that particular secondary source to see if it's a solid source or not. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 03:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - July 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 21:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

WP:MED Newsletter - August 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 20:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:26, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter – September 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 02:35, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:MED Newsletter - October 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 00:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:MED Newsletter - November 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 20:56, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:47, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - December 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 01:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:47, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you and the other editors for your work on the "bipolar disorder" article, a condition I have. The more realistic and evidence-based overview of this topic as compared to most other websites has been truly helpful in understanding it better, and also helped me accept that it's truly a mental disorder, or else it wouldnt be so descriptive of myself. Heh! It's well written, less saccharine and more human. Thanks again, 2601:640:104:3B2D:94DB:2A43:644A:52B3 (talk) 06:00, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - January 2021
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:49, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - February 2021
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages are difficult to read and load slowly over slow connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you.--Renat (talk) 20:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No thanks, I'm fine with how it is. I've seen many users with talk pagers far longer than mine. I suggest talking to them first. Thanks for stopping by. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Resource Exchange
Hey there, just following up to make sure you got this and it can be marked as resolved. Some of my pings haven't been going through lately for whatever reason, so you may not have seen my message. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - March 2021
Ajpolino (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

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

People-first language
I think one of the barriers to getting MOS to say anything about language wrt medical conditions, addictions, disabilities, divergencies, etc, is that the Wiki article is so bad. I think it could be improved and give the correct weight to its adoption/rejection by particular groups. In particular, I would love to find a source that wasn't just advocacy but considered objectively why some groups have adopted and some groups rejected. I'm going to compile some sources on the talk page, with a view to making edits once I've read more about it. Are you interested in working on it? also, who I know thinks a lot about word choice. -- Colin°Talk 10:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disability would be a good place to ask for help.
 * The general options, when you are talking about the preferences of affected adults, are "person-first" and "identity-first". These terms then give the clue to the general pattern:  if the condition is a matter of primary identity (e.g., autism, deafness), then you use identity first:  a Deaf person (capitalized, to show that the person is identifying with the culture) or an autistic person.  When it's not a matter of identity, then you use person-first language:  a woman with dementia, a man with heart disease, a person living with AIDS.  The level of stigma seems to drive the level of anxiety around getting it wrong.
 * This sentence is also correct: "This person with multiple sclerosis is a wheelchair user."  "Wheelchair user" implies agency (because I'm using it), so it's not usually considered a stigmatizing phrase.  (The same logic applies to "cancer survivor".)  But don't ever use "wheelchair-bound", which is stigmatizing, even if the person literally has to be strapped into a wheelchair to prevent injury during use. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:26, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , when you say "the Wiki article, can you clarify which specific article you mean? Do you mean the people-first language Wikipedia article? If so, yes, I'd be happy to take a look at it and improve it when I have some time. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes it is the People-first language article. I completely agree with WhatamIdoing about the preference choices, but am lacking good sources. Will keep looking. We can't be the only people to observe both sides and spot a pattern, yet most of what I read sees one side and runs with it. -- Colin°Talk 09:56, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Benzodiazepine
Hello, just noticed your edit, the ...Panico, R.; Powell, W. H.; Richer, J. C., eds. (1993). A Guide to IUPAC Nomenclature of Organic Compounds. IUPAC/Blackwell Science. pp. 40–3. ISBN 0-632-03488-2. Unknown parameter |name-list-format= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested),... can you adjust? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'm not sure I understand what you want me to adjust. I just looked at the article and it looks fine. The reference formatting is correct and I don't see the error you mentioned here on that page. Please clarify how you think I can help. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Gosh, you are right, it's gone now. Wizzards at work Cheers. Lotje (talk) 08:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Intersex revert
Sorry about that! I missed that there was more to the edit than just the comma addition. The rest of that copyedit looks good and I am grateful for your work. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

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

GOCE June 2021 newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 12:38, 26 June 2021 (UTC).

The Signpost: 27 June 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Mercola
Sorry you've had to deal with the behavior going on at the article. I was first alerted to it at WP:FTN awhile back, but wasn't going to escalate to AE originally as long as it looked like it was just isolated to the article. It looks like anyone else who has tried to step in has just gotten burned out though. I had to at least ban them from my user talk page for that reason.

I hadn't really run into this user until recently, but you mention this has been going on elsewhere? If it's become a trend elsewhere and they don't deescalate, maybe sanctions are the only resort left. Still not sure what to do though since this is such an odd case, but I'm glad I'm not the only one noticing the behavior. KoA (talk) 19:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Just follow all the lengthy advice you've given me. --Hipal (talk) 19:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * This is Tyler's page and not a place where you should be continuing your pursuit of me, so I'll keep it to this comment to say I'm honestly surprised you jumped into a conversation you are not directly involved in a mere four minutes after I posted it. That's especially considering I already told you I wanted to limit my interactions with you in userspace and only keep it to article space. You are already banned from my talk page for that reason, you were warned about harassment by pinging me on your talk page immediately after being warned multiple times on my talk page, and now you're following me around to other users' talk pages.
 * You may not be banned on this page at this time, but I sincerely hope you realize that does not give you permission to follow around editors like that, and I have no intention to engage with your hounding here further. As I've repeatedly said, if you have content you want to discuss in an actual collaborative manner as opposed to your previous behavior, that is for the article talk page as a few people have cautioned you on now. If you want guidance or mentorship on improving your behavior, I already tried and was exhausted (more than once now), so you are better off finding someone else for guidance. There is nothing further I intend to discuss with you in userspace after the time I've already spent trying to help you. KoA (talk) 23:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You're discussing me, so I joined the discussion. Sorry you feel that inappropriate, but see WP:NOTIFY. Wikipedia requires collaboration. --Hipal (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

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

The Signpost: 29 August 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:45, 29 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)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021 Guild of Copy Editors newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Support the change of title from "Osteopathic Medicine in the United States" to "Osteopathic Medicine"
I read your comment on the DO degree page saying osteopathy and osteopathic medicine are not synonymous. I am currently leading a project on making sure we gain this distinction. ILO announced in 2018 of this distinction, and I want people to understand of this distinction; feel free to read about this project here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Osteopathic_medicine_in_the_United_States. Please contribute, as I filed a dispute notice on this, as well; I read your recent edits, too: fantastic job. ORdeDocsaab (talk) 00:24, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

December 2021 GOCE Newsletter
Distributed via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:03, 6 December 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)

The Signpost: 28 December 2021
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color:#E6E6FA; border: 1px solid #7D00B3; margin: 0.5em auto; padding: 0.5em; width:90%; text-align: center"> Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, Isro! (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 March 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:52, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

GOCE April 2022 newsletter
Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 May 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

June GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 June 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Thoughts on Gelasis100?
Hi TylerDurden8823, I've worked on this article intermittently about "Gelesis100" (aka Plenity), which is an FDA approved weight loss loss treatment. I've mostly written the article myself, and it has been tagged by other authors as non-neutral and reading like a press release (an unfamiliar occurrence for me). I have no relationship or conflicts of interests with Gelasis, but I would like to improve the article and I've been unsuccessful soliciting help on the talk page. If you have the time to look over the article and share your thoughts on how to improve it, that'd be great. Thanks! Rytyho usa (talk) 03:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'd be happy to help. I'll take a look and see if there's anything I can do to improve it. Have you reached out directly to the editor(s) who placed the tags to see what they thought? If not, I think it would be a good idea. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 August 2022
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

"Alcohol abuse" to "alcohol use disorder"
Both works so stop changing it for nothing other than to suit your preference. FMSky (talk) 11:21, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Then there should be no problem with the change if you're saying both work. There's no need for stigmatizing language. Your objection appears to be based on nothing than your own preference. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 11:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Just struggling with alcohol use isn't even a "disorder", it's literally wrong to call it like that. --FMSky (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You're wrong. It is a medical disorder and is literally defined as such. There are numerous references and ample science proving this. FYI, I am a physician and have treated tons of people with this medical condition. What are you basing your assertions on exactly? TylerDurden8823 (talk) 11:36, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * As far as i'm concerned, "alcohol abuse" is still a perfectly fine term to use (to my knowledge there is no guideline to prevent people from using it), so it seems to be more a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT --FMSky (talk) 11:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * And, as you originally said, they're interchangeable and you are using your personal preference here and ignoring the actual name for the condition. You very clearly backpedaled. It's irrelevant if I don't like it, you have yet to acknowledge that it is actually the name of the condition. Alcohol abuse is stigmatizing and unnecessarily so. Explain why the stigmatizing term is superior or necessary. If you can't, then you should bow out and acknowledge your mistake. I have yet to see you do so after providing plenty of references verifying that alcohol use disorder is the name for the condition. Are you an expert in the addiction medicine or medical space? I have been here quite a while, just so you know. Let me know when you've read up on alcohol use disorder and read the sources (illustrative, not comprehensive) that I provided. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 11:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC) TylerDurden8823 (talk) 12:47, 2 August 2022 (UTC)