Jump to content

User talk:Doc James/Archive 100

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 95←Archive 98Archive 99Archive 100Archive 101Archive 102→Archive 105

Kratom wiki page

Thanks for making some small edits to the kratom wiki page! The article is currently in minor crisis mode, as the secondary literature reviews that form the basis of it seem to contain errors. I added a section to the talk page showing a major one. We can use all the help we can get, especially if you are willing to check up on the primary sources that the secondary sources cite. The flow seems to be something like kratom has a rare side effect documented in a case of one or two (respiratory depression, seizure), a literature review mentions that as a side effect, then a case study of one from a primary source morphs into a stated side effect on Wikipedia. Kevin143 (talk) 00:09, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Not seeing that as a huge issue. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:20, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Your undoing of changes to the article "Enema"

The references I used are from the National Institutes of Health, part of the U.S. Government. Therefore, your objection, "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" does in no way apply to the edit you reverted. Helen4780 (talk) 12:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

The NIH is the indexer not the publisher or author.
Also not all peer reviewed stuff is a review article. And it does not say "soap" is typically administered. And 2000 is a long time ago. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:20, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Tetanus

Hi, Doc James. Does cyclobenzaprine actually treat tetanus?

Also, why is it listed as an *instance of*: chemical compound? Please make this a teaching moment. Keepin' it real. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:03, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Checkingfax is it used for the symptomatic management of tetanus? This ref says maybe.[1]
Not much of a Wikidatian. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:08, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Doc James. Thank you for the speedy reply. I cannot read anything on that link. It says I have reached my limit. I do not know what that means.
Our Wikipedia article on cyclobenzaprine does not allude to tetanus at all.
As far as Wikidata goes, it seems to me that pharmaceutical drug would be a child instance of chemical compound and therefore instance of:chemical compound would be redundant. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Basically it says cyclobenzaprine can be used to help with the spasms along with other stuff.
I am not sure if all pharmaceuticals are chemical compounds.
It states more than one element must be involved. So would oxygen count as a chemical compound? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Doc James. Thank you. Can you please add something to the Wikipedia article about relief from tetanus muscle cramping, if it is appropriate? That would bring it into alignment with the Wikidata statements.
Oxygen is an element that can be a part of a compound, such as H2O.
Are not all pharmaceutical drugs chemical compounds? Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
O2 is used as a medication in that it comes out of the walls in the hospital. It is on the WHO essential medicines list I think even. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:13, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Oxygen has a chapter (along with other "therapeutic gasses") in Goodman and Gilman, so I'd say that qualifies it as an actual pharmaceutical. No one would question that ether is an anesthetic, after all. Now, whether oxygen is a drug could be more debatable, I guess. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Agree. And if it was a drug that that would mean not all drugs are chemical compounds. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:52, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Doc James. Oxygen, the element is O. O2 is unbound oxygen (dioxygen), and O3 is ozone (trioxygen). So, the stuff coming out of the wall is not an element. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 00:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Tryptofish. Diethyl ether is the compound mixed with alcohol that was formerly used in medicine. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 00:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
But it is not " is an entity consisting of two or more atoms, at least two from different elements" which is what our WP page says. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Yes, I know that. (What you just described is "spirit of ether", as opposed to the inhaled form.) As for O2, it is in effect a stable compound of a single element. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:18, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Vision therapy

Your recent edit changed "and/or computer programs" to "or computer programs". The true state of affairs (I believe confirmed in the references) is that computer programs, often used at home as well as in the office, are often prescribed in addition to the office interventions. As I recall, it is acknowledged that a combination of home and office therapy is better than either alone, or at least than home therapy alone. I am reluctant to do more editing in this area myself, due to the presence of editors who seem duty-bound to denigrate vision therapy as quackery, etc. Lou Sander (talk) 16:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Usually we use "and" or "or" rather than both. Changed it to "And" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Antipsychotics

Do you have any evidence that antipsychotics are beneficial in the long-term? Please link the study. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:4E5F:FC81:7072:E8A3:ADF:D31C (talk) 00:37, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN: you challenge the common wisdom in psychiatry, you have to provide WP:EXTRAORDINARY evidence. Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:48, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
The request was to use secondary sources of high quality per WP:MEDRS. Was not making the above claim. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Granted, but the claim that antipsychotics do more harm than good is WP:EXCEPTIONAL, so it needs exceptional evidence. Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:57, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Agree with you for sure. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
I shall look for sources that satisfy the requirements. Although I do believe this hasn't been explored. Never claimed that they do more harm than good, although you could infer that from the studies. Perhaps there needs to be a clear blurb that there is limited evidence supporting long-term use? Ever read "Anatomy of an Epidemic" by Whitaker? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:4E5F:FC81:7072:E8A3:ADF:D31C (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
That's right: there are lots of things we don't know. But we don't pretend to know them until we do know them. The common wisdom could be mistaken, but this has to be properly shown, see e.g. Wikipedia:Why MEDRS?#Primary scientific literature is exceptionally unreliable in biology why a couple of primary sources aren't enough. Tgeorgescu (talk) 01:19, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Edit to Dimercaptosuccinic acid

Please explain your edit to the Dimercaptosuccinic acid entry. You removed the wikilink to the Journal of Medical Toxicology and removed the PMC link to the article itself The Scientific Basis for Chelation: Animal Studies and Lead Chelation. How do you think these actions improve the quality of the citation? --Ben Best:Talk 01:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah I saw "id=PMID 19700440" and assumed that was an error but it appears to work as well. Usually it is "pmid = 19700440" Reverted back.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:37, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Verruca

Verruca is the common name for a plantar wart in British English, i.e. UK, India, Australia, NZ etc, so deserves to be in the intro, in bold. It appears that this is not the case in the US.

  • that name also redirects to the article
  • the info box actually has 'veruca' - surely a misspelling?

Snori (talk) 09:22, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay sure makes sense. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:28, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

require opinion

@Doc James: I put in a ref on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-onset_hypogonadism, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291337500_The_Aging_Male_Testofen_a_specialised_Trigonella_foenum-graecum_seed_extract_reduces_age-related_symptoms_of_androgen_decrease_increases_testosterone_levels_and_improves_sexual_function_in_healthy_agi , http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/13685538.2015.1135323 and it was taken off by user because they stated it was not a secondary source but on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_contributors%27_help_chat where I went to make sure it was or not, the users there stated it was can I get your opinion on it I replaced the https://medlineplus.gov/ency/patientinstructions/000722.htm ref with it because I thought it was more detailed and overall better ref. the user NOTASpy on the chat for example stated that In this context it is a secondary source (Plmokg22345 (talk) 17:06, 8 October 2016 (UTC))

User:Plmokg22345 This is a primary source [2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:10, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
@Doc James: ok thank you(Plmokg22345 (talk) 22:11, 10 October 2016 (UTC))

Watching brief

Good morning Doc James. I recently asked you to mediate in the extensive discussions with Plomkg22345 (sockpuppet Unkownzero), which you kindly did, regarding the Ageing article. This user has now been blocked indefinitely as of today. The Ageing discussion sections with Plomkg22345 and your mediation can therefore be archived, from my point of view. Furthermore, I suggest as a "watching brief" the ageing/dementia-related articles be monitored for further sockpuppeteering attempts by that user - she seems to focus on mental disorders, where she changes text into the conditional mood (for example she would change "10 percent of old people are affected by dementia" into "10 percent of old people may be affected by dementia"). This is I suggest a useful identifier for her activities, so we can identify and block her future sockpuppets. 86.154.101.55 (talk) 09:24, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

For stats such as you mention "are" is the correct term. I am still traveling for the next couple of days and lots of catching up to do. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

hi

[3] not really a big deal (however for clarity) this [4] (which is primary as you indicated) does not specifically seem to be inconsistent w/ Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles#Standard appendices as it does not indicate solely secondary references/readings for this section. It may be best to alter the text at some point, to indicate at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles#Standard appendices use only secondary references...IMO, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I am not seeing it as adding much? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Stillbirth

Good day Doc James - I have created redirects for synonyms of stillbirth: fetal death and demise. I see you reverted my mention of these synonyms in the article. Maybe they can be added? I also think it is important to mention clearly that the definition of stillbirth depends on where one is in the world based on different gestational age cutoffs. Ear-phone (talk) 23:27, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'll answer briefly: there may be concerns about WP:EUPHEMISM but if you have sources to show these are commonly used lay terms, there could be a place for it in the article. - Brianhe (talk) 23:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Brianhe, yes I have a source - https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/stillbirth/Pages/default.aspx. Ear-phone (talk) 00:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Both "fetal death, fetal demise" are mention in the infobox User:Ear-phone. They are also not complete synonyms but only partial synonyms. Miscarriage can also be called fetal death or fetal demise. Not sure if they really need to be in the first sentence also. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:25, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Doc James - agreed. Thanks. And the stillbirth definition suggestion? Ear-phone (talk) 09:03, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

It does not really "differs according to jurisdiction". Agree this sentence is needed "It results in a baby born without signs of life" and I have re added it. User:Ear-phone other thoughts? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Doc James. Nothing for now. Ta. Ear-phone (talk) 17:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Edwards prevalence

Regarding the edit, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edwards_syndrome&oldid=prev&diff=744380795, you may want to find a better non-web source for the prevalence. Perhaps find a paper and textbook? Papers are more accessible than books. --Deleet (talk) 22:04, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Deleet I think your change is good. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:31, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


Template:Cancer timeline

Please assist with the article I developed: Template:Cancer timeline, and when complete, let me know where you would like to insert it (in the Cancer article. No hesitation required, if you see where it belongs, please insert w/o a need for my approval. Initial Navbox completed, change as necessary. Twillisjr (talk) 16:42, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Maybe over one line rather than many? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:32, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I have reformatted the template as suggested. - Brianhe (talk) 01:10, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Much better thanks User:Brianhe :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Colloidal silver

Can you please look at changes continually being made to the colloidal silver page by CFCF. I am concerned he wants to use foreign language references for a contentious medical subject. And he doesnt seem to understand that a ban on illegal labelling/marketing is not the same as a total ban on consumption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Also please see the Lansdown quote in the opening section. Selectively removing words such as 'in the human body', 'ingestion', and 'inhalation' is revealing of an agenda in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 00:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I've now started a section to discuss this at the bottom of the Medical Silver TALK page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 03:09, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

WIll not be home for a couple of more days. Will look after I get back. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:09, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. The section in TALK has become a bit of a confusing jumble. I will summarise my argument when required. 00:18, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

I have now joined Wikipedia. My name is Bolt376. I have added my name to the paragraphs that I wrote in the Silver medicine TALK page.Bolt376 (talk) 10:02, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for input. The legality question could be settled easily if suitable references were provided. But until then it should stay out. More comments in the Medical silver talk page.Bolt376 (talk) 23:05, 14 October 2016 .Bolt376 (talk) 09:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)(UTC)
You removed one claim that it was illegal for consumption but it was actually in the picture box twice. I removed the other one, and the mention of it in the article. CFCF has put it back in again and is accusing me of extreme disruption. I don't get this. If the reference is inadequate as you seemed to imply why is the claim still in there at all? Bolt376 (talk) 09:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
If you look at the edit it was moved, not removed. No one has said the reference is inadequate, simply that it would be preferable to get an English language reference for the same statement. Since there are none: that isn't possible… The reason your behaviour is disruptive is because you choose to (mis?)read everything as favouring your own position. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 10:05, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

You violate WP:RSUE. You have never provided an exact quote or exact translation. Bolt376 (talk) 10:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I was never requested to, even though I offered one. I actually did translate some exact quotes as well, you can check the talk page if you want. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 10:54, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Tourette syndrome

Thanks, Doc ... but a couple of the changes aren't quite right ... others are completely wrong. I'm going to do some selective repairs now ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:41, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay certainly. Was trying to get the language of the lead a little easier. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:48, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
We can talk about how to make it easier without sacrificing key points and accuracy ... give me time to restore and then step through your edits ... there is too much wrong to fix piecemeal. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Sure. Good to try to keep it to one idea per sentence. Therefore "Extreme Tourette's in adulthood is a rarity, and Tourette's does not adversely affect intelligence or life expectancy" are two different statements that do not depend on each other and therefore should be separated by a period rather than an "and" Am wanting to get this lead simplified for translation. Important of course to keep it correct. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:11, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Gordon's syndrome

Hi, plz youe opinion about this article: Gordon's syndrome, and what about this articles in German Wikipeida: w:de:Gordon-Syndrom.

What do you this about German article and Protein losing enteropathy? --محمود (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Would need to search for references. Often one name gets attached to a number of different conditions. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:19, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
@Doc James: actually I noticed that the contents of the German article share the concept of Protein losing enteropathy--محمود (talk) 14:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
My German is non existent. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Zoster vaccine

Per Talk:Zoster vaccine#Zoster vaccine, there now (or soon) appear to be two zoster vaccines, which is why I moved this article ... and then didn't find any good information about the subunit vaccine. I don't know whether it's marketed anywhere yet. Do you thing they should be treated together or in separate articles (as soon as the new one is marketed)? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 07:46, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Both vaccines can be discussed in the same article IMO. Had not noticed this discussion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:27, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Discussion regarding high-quality reliable source on back pain article

Hi! Could you please explain why you think my source is not "high-quality reliable". Fkbreitl (talk) 09:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Fkbreitl It is a small primary source. We are looking for review articles. Looked for a secondary source on the topic and did not find any. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:31, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Have moved to the research section. To early to be a treatment.[5]Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:36, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I see. The research section is a good idea. Thank you.--Fkbreitl (talk) 21:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Outreach

Hey James, It occurs to me that there might be an opportunity for outreach through White Coat, Black Art. I'm sure they'd be interested in what you've been up to with WPMed, and it could generate some wider interest. Think you'd be up for it? LeadSongDog come howl! 20:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Sure. Do you have contacts their? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
No, I'm just a listener. The wp article links to their website, though: Contact page LeadSongDog come howl! 17:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Willem Einthoven

Just a suggestion, but since this is the first protection, perhaps it should be shorter than six months? Enigmamsg 19:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

It is a poorly watched BLP. You feel three months would be better? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:31, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I think a big reason it's poorly watched is because it's not a BLP. ;) Enigmamsg 20:38, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes good point. Historical figure, not BLP I stand corrected :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:40, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Advise for the Editing

Dear Dr. James,

Thank you for your kind advise in this regard. i will try to come with more authentic content in future.

thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBehzadKhan (talk • contribs) 20:39, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Nairspecht

Hi Doc, with regard to the unblock request made by Nairspecht, I'm curious what data you were looking at to edify your decision. On his talk page you mentioned finding something, and I was just curious what that was. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

One can make out the details by doing an in depth analysis of their edits and those of the account associated with them. It helps to have off WP data to guide you but the concerns can be determined without it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I guess I was curious if there were some sort of CU logs that you happened to find and that I was unaware existed. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
No just did a combination of looking around the internet and looking at the articles edited by the accounts in question. It becomes apparent that this is undisclosed paid editing. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Doc, I think the decline was malformed. There's a substituted template thing happening at the end of it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:08, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks and fixed. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:16, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Sock/meat puppets

Hi Doc James. I recently AfD'd [6] and you PROD'd [7] [8] recently created persons of Somali origin. There seems to be a cabal of accounts that are protecting each other's articles against deletion, either by removing speedy and AfD tags, or leaving comments contesting deletion. Could this be a valid SPI case, or do you think it's meat puppetry? In either case, there is a person or persons who desperately want these articles to stay. --Drm310 (talk) 06:28, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Agree SPI would be useful. These are likely articles by the people themselves. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:46, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Semen virus or SV

Semen virus or SV -- LOL! That cracked me up. :) Damotclese (talk) 16:29, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Yup Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Image

The situation at FGM reminded me of the image you uploaded of the half-naked 13-year old disabled girl, which I see still hasn't been deleted. Discussion here and here. Rich has blacked out her eyes, but she's still identifiable. I can nominate it for deletion, but knowing Commons there's no guarantee that will succeed.

It might succeed if you were to request speedy deletion as the uploader, on the grounds that you uploaded it in error. See Commons:Deletion policy. You could argue that the girl is identifiable and has not consented (and there's no evidence that her parents consented to widespread use); that another editor had already uploaded an image of her with the head cropped off; and that the image is unlikely to be used. They might still require a deletion discussion, but it's worth a try. Are you willing to do that? SarahSV (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

We are not using it anymore as it is not a simple case of Marfan's. So I have no object to it being deleted.
With respect to consent, it was published in 2012 by BioMed Central so I would imagine that they got appropriate consent. Their is no reason to believe they wouldn't have. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:35, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Okay so nominated the version I uploaded. The other was not uploaded by me. User:CFCF I think uploaded the other one. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:42, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Speech Synthesis article

Saw that you reverted my edit in this article citing cut and paste from some other website. It did [b]NOT[/b] come from that site but rather Wikipedia itself at this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_TI-99/4A — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.173.53 (talk) 01:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. You need to state that in the edit summary to comply with the cc BY sa license we are under. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Unreffed

http://www.wikimp3.org/album/wwe-hall-of-fame-2012-the-music-2012/140018/ undelete my edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmm134 (talk • contribs) 03:11, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

It is unreferenced and copied from elsewhere. Right now I am trying to figure out what you are doing. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

adding missing cd infos via itunes and wikipedia sister page wikimp3.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmm134 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Not notable IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:42, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, with respect to copyright, please show me that particular part in an article, I copied verbatim to remove it, because one thing is used sources and other text. I generally make partial translations, not copies. thanks--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
please check the Spanish version of this article, and you can see that is a partial translation. I have taken no part of another website, except for wikipedia in Spanish.Catedral de Resistencia You can also check the history of the article in Spanish and observe that: I do not add a single letter, simply partially translated into English History--Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 19:08, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
When you translate an article from another language you need to say which language you translated it from in the initial edit summary. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:50, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Email

I don't understand about what's going on with the email, but, both of the emails were just to say, thanks for letting me know. I fixed the problem and reposted the basic information this morning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DlronW (talk • contribs) 00:00, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Perfect thanks User:DlronW Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Unexplained reverts

Please explain your reverts in the future. 92.6.182.237 (talk) 04:25, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

The entity that has the vasectomy reversal is a "man" not a "vasectomees"[9] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Revert

The image made it better! Why did you revert it? 50.201.16.252 (talk) 20:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

This edit [10]. We simply do not do that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:16, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Audio tracks

Hey doctor feelgood can you or your moderators make or creat articles for ( Stone Cold Steve Austin: The Entrance Music EP / Hall of Fame 2012 - The Music / WrestleMania - The Music 2013 / SummerSlam - The Music 2013 / The Federation Era / The Music of WCW / WrestleMania - The Music 2014 / The Music of the WWE Network / Total Divas: The Music / WWE Tough Enough: The Music / WWE: Undertaker - From the Vault ) if you can if not RSVP ok ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmm134 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doc_James/Archive_100&oldid=1090504079"