User talk:Der Berg13
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Connecticut/Purpose_of_Education_(Fall) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Der Berg13, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:15, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Training
[edit]Please do the training for students working on health content. This was dramatically not OK. Pinging user:Shalor (Wiki Ed). Jytdog (talk) 20:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Source selection and citations
[edit]Further to the training, please read and follow the guidance below (sourcing per [{WP:MEDRS]]; citing sources per WP:MEDHOW
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN.
- While editing any article or a wikipage, on the top of the edit window you will see a toolbar which says "cite" click on it
- Then click on "templates",
- Choose the most appropriate template and fill in the details beside a magnifying glass followed by clicking said button,
- If the article is available in Pubmed Central, you have to add the pmc parameter manually -- click on "show additional fields" in the template and you will see the "pmc" field. Please add just the number and don't include "PMC".
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. Jytdog (talk) 20:49, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Notes
[edit]Hi! I wanted to give you some feedback on the material you added to 5-MeO-DMT, which was removed by another user (Jytdog). There were issues with sourcing and tone, which I'll go over below. Jytdog has linked to the training module on editing medicine related topics, which I would like you to take.
- With medicine, health, and science related topics, there are a certain set of guidelines for what sources can be used, called WP:MEDRS. Essentially they came about because there were some issues with sourcing being used in these article topic areas, but I won't go too much into the history of this. There are four types of sources that are typically associated with these topic areas, including popular press. I'm copying the first three directly from MEDRS:
- A primary source in medicine is one in which the authors directly participated in the research or documented their personal experiences. They examined the patients, injected the rats, ran the experiments, or at least supervised those who did. Many, but not all, papers published in medical journals are primary sources for facts about the research and discoveries made.
- A secondary source in medicine summarizes one or more primary or secondary sources, usually to provide an overview of current understanding of the topic, to make recommendations, or to combine results of several studies. Examples include literature reviews or systematic reviews found in medical journals, specialist academic or professional books, and medical guidelines or position statements published by major health organizations.
- A tertiary source usually summarizes a range of secondary sources. Undergraduate or graduate level textbooks, edited scientific books, lay scientific books, and encyclopedias are examples of tertiary sources.
- A popular press source would be things like coverage in newspaper or magazine articles, websites, and the like, such as the New York Times, Popular Science, and so on. These types of sites - even the ones who are more well known and thought of - will frequently take liberties with information and leave out key details or even misrepresent the data, as their main goal is to get people to read their work. They may also be reporting on content that hasn't been published yet.
- To start, popular press sources should never be used to back up claims in an article unless you are writing about the topic's history or cultural aspects. They just aren't seen as reliable when it comes to science and health information. You also have to make sure that the website is seen as a reliable source on Wikipedia. Not all websites are seen as reliable - in fact, I'd wager that the number of sites that would be seen as reliable sources are actually incredibly low and are less than 10% of the sites out there. You need to make sure that the site has a good editorial oversight, that they're transparent about the editorial process, aren't trying to sell the reader something or endorse a specific viewpoint, and are routinely seen as a reliable, authoritative source by other reliable sources (typically academic and scholarly sources). Some of the sources you've used go to websites that aim to sell the visitor products or classes, so they wouldn't be seen as reliable.
- Primary sources can be used as long as you have independent coverage in secondary or tertiary sources that cover the source. For example, a literature review that covers the primary source (typically a study) would be good, as would a textbook that also discusses the study. The reason why these are so important is that they help give context and verify the information. The publishing journal may look over the study, but they won't provide context and they're really only looking to ensure that the study doesn't have anything that would automatically invalidate it. There's also a question of original research, as that literature review or textbook can help show why one specific study was chosen to highlight and mention over another, similar study that may state a completely different finding.
- To be honest, the best sources for medicine and science related articles are academic and scholarly secondary or tertiary sources.
- Be careful with tone and style. We can only summarize what has been explicitly stated in the source material. Make sure that you avoid writing in an essay or argumentative style. This is something that can be hard to get used to, as most of us are used to this style in our everyday lives. Also make sure that you don't go into too much detail about a study unless it's absolutely necessary. This wasn't too bad, but you definitely want to give a general overview and studies are very specific by necessity.
I'd highly recommend that you work on this in your sandbox and, when ready to move material back to the article, that you discuss this on the article's talk page prior to moving it. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Medicinal and Therapeutic Use
[edit]Thank you for your feed back! I can see how some of the sources may be unprofessional but asides from one or two I believe all are scholarly articles or articles written by medical institutions. As for tone I will try and fix this issue but could you maybe give me the specific sources that were found to be unprofessional?
- Please take the time to think about what a secondary source is, as defined above, and apply the definition yourself. You have to put in the work to actually engage with what MEDRS calls for, and I have seen no sign of you doing that yet. What does MEDRS call for? Jytdog (talk) 22:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)