User talk:CHM333five

Welcome!

Hello, CHM333five, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Masum Ibn Musa ^Conversation 03:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CHM333five, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi CHM333five! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! AmaryllisGardener (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

We at Wikipedia love evidence-based medicine. Please cite high-quality reliable sources. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. A list of resources to help edit such articles can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. WP:MEDHOW walks through editing step by step. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

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

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! 220 of ^Borg 17:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-user account

Your user page indicates that you are "a group of five students" working together on a school project. Working together on a school project -- super! Five students sharing a single account -- not good. You each need your own account. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the Wikipedia account is run by one individual, but the content is produced with the contribution of five individuals. The course assignment required that only one account makes the contributions. CHM333five (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like an odd requirement for the course assignment. Generally, instructors who incorporate Wikipedia into course work also incorporate the collaborative nature of Wikipedia into the assignments. Allowing each contributor to make their own edits (under their own account name) helps the professor assess which member of the group is doing which work. You might want to point your professor to WP:SUP so they can come up to speed on the best ways to use Wikipedia in their coursework. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary sources

Per WP:MEDRS you are very strongly recommended to use secondary sources. If you do not know what these are we can help explain. Otherwise the article has been redirected. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is for a group assignment. We need this article to stay on Wikipedia for two weeks. We have used peer-reviewed journal articles. Please let the page remain as is for this time. Thank you. CHM333five (talk) 23:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is not how Wikipedia works. Here is a list of review articles [1]

Please NOTE that peer reviewed is not the SAME as review article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have compiled a list of some common mistakes students and new editors make:

The highest quality sources are needed for medical content. This include review articles (note this is not the same as peer reviewed) position statements from national and internationally recognized bodies (think CDC, WHO, NICE, FDA, etc), and major medical textbooks. Lower quality sources may be removed per WP:MEDRS.
References go after not before punctuation (see WP:MOS)
We use very few capital letters. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
Do not use the url from the inside net of your university library. The rest of the world cannot see it.
If you use textbooks we need page numbers.
Please format your references as explained at WP:MEDHOW or like the ones already in the article. This is simple once you get the PMID.
Every sentence can be referenced. We reference more densely than other sources.
Never "copy and paste" from sources. We run copy and paste detection software on new edits.
Section order typically follows the instructions here at WP:MEDMOS
Please talk to us. Wikipedia works by collaboration and this takes place on the talk pages of both articles and user.

Again welcome and thank you for joining us.

P.S. Please share this with your fellow learners and instructors.

James Heilman a.k.a User:Doc James
MD, CCFP(EM), Wikipedian
Faculty of Medicine
University of British Columbia

and

The Team at Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please share with your classmates and teacher. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

Your recent editing history at Zinc deficiency and psychiatric disorders shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments on your article draft

I moved your article to your user sandbox at User:CHM333five/sandbox. Sandboxes are not mainspace Wikipedia articles, so you can edit there as you like. It's often recommended that students start their wikipedia projects by writing articles in their sandbox, or in the Draft namespace, so they can get feedback from their instructor or from Wikipedians before moving the article to the mainspace - where, as you've seen, it may be edited by anyone who notices it.

There are a couple of issues here that suggest you haven't gotten from your instructor or class as much direction as would be advisable. The setup of one account per group of students is odd, even if it's just one person logging into the account and clicking the buttons. It's harder that way for the instructor to tell who made what contribution; it's harder for you guys to collaborate if you aren't using the wiki infrastructure specifically meant for that purpose; and it obscures copyright attribution.

It's also not a good idea for class assignments to involve expectations like 'edits have to stay live for two weeks'. That means your class is at the mercy of the fickle attentions of the Wikipedia community, and whether your edits 'stick' for some period of time or not is largely random.

Finally, to echo Doc James above - the way you've written your article suggests that you've done some very good research into your topic, but it is a little different than what Wikipedia prefers, especially for medical articles. Articles here are descriptive, not interpretive - whereas school assignments usually expect some original interpretive contribution. Articles about medical topics, in particular, should rely primarily on WP:MEDRS guidelines, which mean you should be looking at secondary sources - i.e., review articles. We need to know how particular interesting bits of research fit into the broader field, and for medical articles, we need to be making well-substantiated claims, not overgeneralizing from limited data. For example, in your article, you discuss GPR39 and zinc. A very interesting topic, but not one that as yet is clearly understood - it's still a matter of ongoing research whether the zinc agonism is by itself biologically relevant, never mind relevant to specific medical problems.

Hopefully you can pass some of this information along to your classmates and to your instructor. School and university projects and Education Program are good places to start on Wiki editing for coursework. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]