Jump to content

User talk:Doc James/Archive 114

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 110←Archive 112Archive 113Archive 114Archive 115Archive 116→Archive 120

Hepatitis C

The article on Hepatitis C is seriously outdated. In particular, the treatment section. Would you please update it? Thanks. 73.119.19.79 (talk) 06:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes it is slightly out of date. Will take a look at it in a bit. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:45, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
James, the cure rate for the HepC drugs is now well over 90% for the newest regimens and nears 100%. I think it's more accurate to say "more than 90%" than "about 90%". Heck, we would be justified in saying near 100%. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Some types have cures of close to 100%. Have changed to about 95% per the updated WHO source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm referring to the newest data. There are new emerging therapies that are pangenotypic with cure rates nearing 100% but I think saying ~95% is a reasonable middle ground for now. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:45, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks User:TylerDurden8823. We also want to try to stick with high quality secondary sources. The newest literature is often a little optimistic. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:47, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I know, it's relatively new data but I'm sure high-quality secondary sources will verify >90% cure rates approaching 100%. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 00:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes the WHO now supports about 95% so getting there. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Nu? 73.119.19.79 (talk) 18:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Primary sources and review

Hi, there appears to be an uneven application of the rule of no primary sources, or else I am missing something. In this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer, as a few examples, citations 31, 44 (not even a scienctific journal article), citation 64, and 113 (also not even a scientific article) are not review articles. Should those be removed as well? 13:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jb12345678910111213 (talk • contribs)

Comment from a talk page watcher: You are right that none of those sources is fully compatible with WP:MEDRS, but it isn't so much a matter of uneven application as of limited time available for maintainers to work on articles. Please feel free to look for better sources. (I consider 113 to be acceptable as it stands, though.) Looie496 (talk) 13:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks User:Jb12345678910111213 will look. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Attention about Edit Warring Happening

At Comparison of MD and DO in the United States. Multiple warnings left here [1] and here [2] for a veteran user who should know better. I've started a talk page discussion but they continue to violate WP:STICKTOSOURCE and are inappropriately edit warring their content into the article. I think administrator intervention may be required to sufficiently address this (they persisted despite clear warning of edit warring). TylerDurden8823 (talk) 21:36, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Sock?

Hi Doc! Please check if this user is sockpuppet or not as it seems to be one. Reason: WP:COI on page Wheels (2017 film). Cheers! 185.183.107.151 (talk) 04:40, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Agree likely COI. But one needs to have the account they are similar too before one can get an WP:SPI. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Anisha Kauldher

Searching "Miss Quesnel Anisha Kauldher" in news gives the evidence from the official website of the city of Quesnel.

That does not make one notable. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Atracurium and RSI (or not)

Dear Doc James,

You reverted my edit of the Atracurium Besilate page. The reason you gave was that Suc (or roc) is generally used for RSI, not atra, which is perfectly true, but the paragraph in question does not mention rapid sequence induction. The reference from which this bit would appear to have been taken says that atracurium is used for Facilitation of endotracheal intubation; however, succinylcholine generally is preferred in emergency situations where rapid intubation is required. The article itself says It [atracurium] has also been used to help with endotracheal intubation but suxamethonium (succinylcholine) is generally preferred for this use, dropping that bit about situations where rapid intubation is required and giving the false impression that administration of atracurium before intubation is unusual or a thing of the past. Of course, the article could have mentioned that atracurium is not the relaxant of choice for RSI but then it is surely primarily about what the drug is used for; the range of indications for which it unsuitable is wide indeed.

I gave this as explanation for my edit: Succinlycholine is not routinely used in preference to atracurium, except when a rapid sequence induction is needed. Is that not true?

Would you like to revert your reversion, or should I?

Kindest regards,

Moletrouser

True. How about "It can be used to help with endotracheal intubation but takes up to 2.5 minutes to result in appropriate intubating conditions."? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:49, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Jeffmcneill deletion request

You blocked this user and they want you to delete their account. You have ignored this request. Please go ahead and accede to their wishes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.182.12.57 (talk) 03:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

They can make a formal request. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Question About USDA Nutrition Tables

Hi James, I was recently trying to add some micronutrients (copper, in particular) to the USDA nutrition tables displayed on certain food articles but there appears to be a coding problem that won't allow me or Zefr to do this. Although it doesn't receive the spotlight very often, it is an essential micronutrient worth mentioning. What are your thoughts about this? Just as an example, Zefr & I tried to make these changes on the kiwifruit page. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

TylerDurden8823, it's because copper isn't actually in the {{Infobox nutritional value}} code, which is why you have to manually add it. There was a discussion about six years ago as to why it wasn't included, but it never got a result. Might be worth restarting? Primefac (talk) 18:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
We tried manually adding it but it still doesn't display. I'll see if I can revive the discussion because copper and selenium are essential micronutrients that are worth displaying. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
TylerDurden8823, that's because you used the wrong params. It should have been |opt1v= not |opt1v_mg=. I can see where the confusion would arise, though, given the others have the _mg suffix. I've updated the kiwi page, but I'll leave the others to you. Primefac (talk) 18:41, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I don't understand why that was incorrect. Also, the way it's added doesn't display copper under the minerals where it should be nor does it say what percentage DV or RDA it is in this serving (both of which I think are important details). TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:44, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Without going into the technical details about how templates work, the reason it doesn't display like the other minerals is because the "opt" parameters aren't designed to look like the others. The reason the RDAs and %s are included for the other minerals is because they're hard-coded into the template. If you wanted to show the RDA for copper, you'd need to set |opt1v={{align|right|({{#expr:XXX/15 round 0}}%)}} XXX mg}} where XXX is the amount of copper. Actually, you could avoid the #expr by just doing |opt1v={{align|right|(Percentage)}} XXX mg}}, where the percentage is the % daily allowance. That should cause it to show up properly, but that also means that if the RDA changes at some point in the future your numbers will be way off. I suggest starting a discussion at the template talk to possibly add copper (and any other minerals) into the template. Primefac (talk) 18:51, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I did, and thanks for helping. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
User:Primefac thanks for helping to resolve this :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:27, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Always happy to help :) Primefac (talk) 02:08, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Care to comment?

Talk:Metformin#Aging Pashley (talk) 14:03, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Yup have seen the claims over the last couple of years. Is it enough to reach a short discussion in the "society and culture" section? Maybe. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:32, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Morning sickness translation

The English morning sickness article has been translated into Vomisman ak gwosès since the English term doesn't translate well.

Best Regards,
Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 15:24, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
User:Barbara (WVS) many thanks. Do you have infoboxes in ht? And if not would you be interested in them? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:45, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
I think that would work nicely. Other templates would also be good. I guess I can translate info box templates as easily as articles. I have experience in creating and editing templates.
Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 20:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
User:CFCF can you help here? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

— Just put one in, it was installed under the old name "Template:Infobox disease" but what I'm guessing what we'd really want is to have the {{infobox medical condition (new)}} live in all languages. Best, Carl Fredrik talk 08:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes we want the new template. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:10, 28 June 2017 (UTC)S
Shall I translate the names of the parameters? I can post it here since this is where we started the discussion.
Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 18:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
User:CFCF what works best? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Done. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 18:36, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

— If you were to post it here I can make a note of it. However porting that template to ht-wiki is actually a bit of work. I will see if I can get to it during the coming week. Barbara (WVS) — you don't happen to be an admin on ht-wiki? That would make things much easier... Carl Fredrik talk 21:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I've asked to be an administrator but it hasn't happened yet. WhatamIdoing is looking into it. I've made templates before, let me give it a try. Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 19:17, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Htwiki has no admins at the moment, and we really ought to have at least two (in case someone's busy/sick/traveling). We just had another volunteer boldly nominate herself. Barbara, would you mind copying the format that she used, and nominating yourself? Please ping me; I want to be the first to vote.  ;-) WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:18, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
User:Barbara (WVS) were did you apply? User:WhatamIdoing are you suggesting I apply? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:02, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
James, you'd probably need to spend some time at the wiki before applying for adminship. We have a completely different approach there to just about everything. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Agree. Not sure who your message "would you mind copying the format that she used, and nominating yourself?" was directed to. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

IP on the loose

This diff is indicative. Reversed some of his stuff but not enough time to fix it all. Ratel (talk) 21:56, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Ratel thanks. Fixed much of the rest of it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

10 years of editing!

Hey, Doc James. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 01:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks User:Chris troutman :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:07, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society

Dear Doc James/Archive 114,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 01:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

POV/possible paid editing concerns

If you have a chance, could you look at BNI (organization). I ran into it while handling an unrelated OTRS matter and I noticed it's had its share of POV issues in the history. It may not even be notable. I don't really care to go down that rabbit hole because I'm in the middle of a ticket, but I thought you may be interested in following up. ~ Rob13Talk 16:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks User:BU Rob13. The immediate concern that pops out is the fact that only one to two refs are independent of the organization itself. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:55, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Ivan Misner is also of concern. Refs do not appear to add up. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:32, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

added Happyme22 • Dragons flight
removed Zad68

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
  • A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
  • Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Crohn's disease

This article includes a link to what I believe is a proper source for medical information on Wikipedia. I'm not sure which section would be the best place for this discovery and I'm reluctant to try to make the addition myself. You seem to be someone who would revert me if I did it the wrong way, so you'd be the person to ask.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:36, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Vchimpanzee we tend to follow WP:MEDRS with respect to sourcing content. This means references should be high quality review articles. We tend not to accept the popular press (which is the link you provide) or primary sources even if peer reviewed. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Right, but this site links to what may be a proper source. So someone could use that.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Looks like it links to a primary source, so the source it links to appears to be unsuitable.
This is the primary source [3]Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:16, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
So is anyone going to add the information, because I don't feel the confidence to do that myself. Medical information is just too hard.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Nothing there really to add. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, sure, if the unacceptable source has the clear information and the good source makes it unrecognizable.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Only the pharmacists say the cookies help people with Crohn's disease. The reason we can't use this is that a study has not confirmed their observations. I was hoping that's what the study you linked to did, but it said nothing about Crohn's disease. in fact, it said nothing that made any sense to me.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I was looking for another place to see if I could get away with posting this information. "Might work" and "tested only in mice" are a long way from anything we can use.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:51, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

revisions

Manson is not up to date on the biology of Entamoeba, is incomplete, out of date on current usage, and so is not a good general reference for everything in the article. It may be OK on the clinical aspects. For example, amoebiasis is not a disease it is an infection - amoebic dysentery is a disease and so is not the same thing as amoebiasis. The original text I wrote was giving alternative terms and spellings used for amoebiasis. I have been working on amoebiasis for over 25 years and know the literature well since I wrote a bit of it. I am not saying my changes were perfect but the resulting text was accurate.Entamoeba (talk) 21:47, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Why is Manson's not a good textbook? This article is about the disease rather than the biology of Entamoeba. Changing text to something the refs does not say without changing the refs is not an improvement. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:16, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Neurologic music therapy (NMT)

Dear Doc James,

I hope are doing well.

My name is Kyurim Kang. On the behalf of the Academy of Neurologic Music Therapy, I am posting this message. First, we appreciate your contribution to the NMT Wikipedia page. We are now trying to develop and revise the NMT Wikipedia page under the NMT Advisory Council to ensure that we provide accurate information about NMT to the public. We recognized that there is some ambiguous information on the page, so we are considering editing the entire page. However, we would like to kindly ask your permission before we delete your information. We are also happy to have your suggestions for editing the NMT page. If you have any questions, please email to kyurim.kang@mail.utoronto.ca. Again, we really appreciate your contribution.

Best Regards, Kyurim Kang — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyurim1 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Kyurim1 thanks for reaching out, have provided some advice on your talk page.
Would be good to disclose your relationship to the topic on your talk page. Feel free to ping me if you have further questions. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:12, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Heading

Fair enough. I am one of 3 primary publishers in this field and you will see that I am a coauthor on some of the articles and one you see listed. Where do I need to indicate that I am a co author? You are so fast! Thanks Not sure waht all the messages mean. Look forward to being brought up to speed. Dean Dr Reeves (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Also, I will not be removing a reference unless I have a new one by the same author or unless it is irretreivably outdated. If I don't have same author to substitude I will try to leave it in to use for clarification with updated information about the incorrect comment. I want to confuse the least so will standby for further nudges.

Replied on your talk page. Stuff from the last 10 years is generally deemed okay. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:46, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Narcissistic personality disorder

Hi,

I noticed you restored some content I removed. In particular,

Various model have been presented with different ways to further subcategorise the disorder.

and

Therapy is often difficult as people with the disorder frequently do not consider themselves to have a problem

The first one; That's completely true, various models have been presented, none of which are accepted in clinical standards. I find my edit more clear, I take it you don't. I suggest a compromise with changing

While the DSM-5 regards narcissistic personality disorder as a homogeneous syndrome, there is evidence for variations in its expression

to

There is evidence of subcategories within narcissistic personality disorder, however no subcategories are accepted in diagnostic criteria as of 2017.

That's more clear with it's removal of 'variations of expression' and the 'homogeneous syndrome' and highlights that these are not clinically accepted.

For the second edit, if you read through the source, you'll note what I removed is a mischaracterisation of the source material (unless I'm misunderstanding the wikipedia's interpretation, in which case I'd argue it's ambiguous). Again, I suggest a compromise to

The disorder is rarely the primary reason for people seeking treatment, which may make therapy more difficult.

Hollth (talk) 11:16, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

This "as people with the disorder frequently do not consider themselves to have a problem." was supported by the reference provided.
For example it says "the grandiosity and defensiveness that characterize narcissistic personality disorder militate against acknowledging problems and vulnerabilities and make engagement in any form of psychotherapy difficult"
Other sources also discussion "lack of insight"[4] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:54, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Just a heads up

Your name came up more than once in ticket:2017071310023246 --S Philbrick(Talk) 13:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks User:Sphilbrick will look. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:00, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

reverting "Hope Lee" entry?

Just contacted Wikimedia Support Team regarding the delete of "Hope Lee" entry. Mr. Stephen Philbrick suggested that I get in touch with you.

The "Hope Lee" entry has been deleted on Wikipedia, as explained by Mr. Stephen Philbrick, "it was deleted as a copyright infringement of http://hopelee.shawwebspace.ca/profile/. It was deleted on 9 August 2016 by Doc James"

Whoever put it up on Wikipedia initially, probably got the information from Canadian Who's Who, or the website at the Canadian Music Centre, or the Canadian Encyclopedia of Music and Musicians. As the information is always provided by the subject of the entry, in this case, Hoe Lee, this explains why the information is similar to Hoe Lee's webpage on ShawSpace. The ShawSpace webpage is no longer existing.

My question is, can the entry of Hope Lee be reverted on Wikipedia? Mr. Philbrick is willing to assist if necessary.

Thank you for your attention.

68.146.197.202 (talk) 16:40, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

So the article is [5]
I assume this account is also you User:Anne Keng Wei?
The problem is that the article was nearly all copied and pasted from a previously published source if I remember corrected.
Specifically [6]
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:10, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
The other article also had copy and paste issues[7] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:19, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Ibuprofen

James, is this really necessary? I don't see the point of repeating the trade names in the Drugbox when they are mentioned clearly in the lead and—especially—when we have a whole article devoted to them. Last time I checked, there wasn't any clear-cut guidance in MOS:PHARM nor in the Drugbox documentation about how many trade names to mention; surely common sense should apply here. Besides, "three most common" is problematic for drugs so widely available worldwide. Why not Aleve, then, or Brufen as the IP insists? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:00, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

We generally list a few brandnames in the infobox. Aleve is not ibuprofen but the brand for napoxen. We also list three and thus not Brufen. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:45, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Prolotherapy pages

As I am make the first draft on these changes, it is important to convey that this will be a collaborative effort of primary authors, not just me, and there will be editing that goes on for at least a month after I am finished. Any primary references I delete will be updated, typically by a later version from the same author;

e.g., Dr. Rabago's 2017 review was substituted this morning for a further clarification of the definition.

e.g., Dr Rabago will have no trouble deleting his 2011 deference commenting on prolotherapy being considered alternative medicine, since the references are increasingly robust, but he will sign off on this soon enough.

I need to learn the style, and I like your rules. I better like them, as I just realized I am the listed coeditor of the WikiDocs section on prolotherapy that needs updating quite a lot as well. Hopefully the editing characters/method will be similar.

Have a good day. Thanks for your collegial corrections.

Dean Dr Reeves (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Will look. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:46, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Body Volume Indicator/Body Volume Index

Hi James,

I have edited a couple of pages today that were originally created by my company, and you have put a redirect to central obesity on here! By doing this you have removed all of the information and validation data that explains BVI - could you please explain why you have done this?

The information in both pages is the same, but this is because we have copied and pasted from Index to Indicator, as the index pages needs ammending.

I now can't access either page!

Thanks,

Ruth :) RuthEmaWalker (talk) 14:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes the pages were not supported by the references provided. You also need to follow WP:PAID
You appear to be associated with User:RW710814 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:18, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

absent edit summaries

what makes you better than the rest that you can omit edit summaries? If you are referring to these edits the explanation is there[8]--Wuerzele (talk) 22:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Wuerzele which edit? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:09, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
you know, on Eculizumab and on CCHF,
your edit on CCHF is such a mechanical cookie-cutter edit without you having delved into the matter- as always in infectious diseases- it shows you really do not know about what you edit. You use such stiff language and changed semantics in some cases dropping the meaning completely. --Wuerzele (talk) 20:45, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Checking on a deleted page

Dear James,

I've been asked by a former client to check on why his Wikipedia page was deleted. I did some PR work for him in the past and he asked me to check into this for him. His name is Bernt Ullmann. Seems to me that he should be very qualified.

He has created global Lifestyle collections for big celebrities like Jennifer Lopez, her husband Marc Anthony, Adam Levine, Nicki Minaj, Rolling Stones, Steven Tyler, American Idol to mention a few. He has generated celebrity fashion transactions valued at over $6 billion. He has had a lot of press over the years about his business ventures.

Can you please provide insight into why his page was deleted and what can be done to restore it?

Thanks,

184.88.249.218 (talk) 22:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC) (I am having trouble signing in. My username is TriJenn)

Yes the user who created the article User:Yeitnil was using socks in violation of a block and in violation of our WP:TOU. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

So, even if the person qualified, his page can be deleted without even a discussion? Seems unfair to the person and it also seems this doesn't serve Wikipedia users well with such a notable person not having a page. Thanks for your quick response. 184.88.249.218 (talk) 13:56, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

If this was the case we should get rid of rules about socking. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) I do not know if the person is notable or not, but if so, it could be perfectly reasonable to delete the socked page, but then (unless the pagename has been salted) recreate the page while following proper editing processes. But that depends upon the subject genuinely satisfying the notability guidelines. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your input, Tryptofish So, what is the "proper editing process?" Can I submit it myself? Do you have the ability to look at the page and see if it "genuinely satisfies the notability guidelines?" If so, can you start the process? TriJenn (talk) 20:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Replied at my user talk. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:19, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Oxygen therapy

Why do you think the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death is not a good source? Rathfelder (talk) 20:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

It is the Guardian[9] summarizing a primary source by this group.
This does not make sense "34% of UK patients die while only 18% die in Spain and 10% die in France. In the UK the death rate is rising and was 30% in 2011."
34% of people who go to the hospital do not die in the UK. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:46, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

So it's the report, not the source you object to? I thought we were supposed to use secondary sources?Rathfelder (talk) 09:01, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

We are supposed to use high quality secondary sources per WP:MEDRS. The report itself is a primary source. The Guardian article is a low quality secondary source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:04, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for what you do

I just noticed that you caught yet another undisclosed paid editing sock farm. That kind of work is underappreciated, but it really is crucial to the integrity of the project. I hope you keep up your efforts toward it and am glad for the ones you've already done. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:20, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I am often helped by others :-) But agree it is important work and appreciate the words of support. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

How to correct deleted page

Hello Doc James,

You had concurred with user DGG on the deletion of the page "Nikhil Joshi" for being promotional (G11). It was not our intention for it to be promotional, and we would like to correct it to abide by the standards and be accepted. Can you please suggest us on the procedure; are we able to get access to the page to make the needed changes, or shall we make a new page?

Thanks --114.143.28.68 (talk) 04:57, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

You have not followed WP:PAID.
I assume User:NipunChawla1234 is also you? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:40, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
No I am not that user, they were previously working with our company. Now that they have gone and even though I do not have a background in this, I am trying to figure out what's going on and how to fix it. So I appreciate your help in trying to work this out. Based on what you have told me, my understanding is that I need to rewrite the page so that it is not promotional and include a statement that I am employed by the company which is run by the person's page I am editing. Is that correct? Is there any other considerations? Can I get access to the page or should I set up a new one?
Thanks again for your help --114.143.28.68 (talk) 07:23, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
You need to disclose who you work for yes. And any intermediaries involved with your work.
You than will need to agree to us the WP:AFC process. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:00, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

WHO source on Febrile seizures

Hi Doc James

I have been researching vaccines and see that the WHO has identified several vaccines as the cause of Febrile seizures - see here: http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/vaccinfosheets/en/ and associated pdfs.

This entry does not specify the potential cause of the seizures and I thought this might be useful.

What is also missing is any data on how long seizures can go on for. It indicates that there is a chance that they might re-occur but not any indication of what to expect in terms of days/weeks years.

- Richard RichardGKnight (talk) 10:00, 21 July 2017 (UTC) [1]

References

  1. ^ http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/vaccinfosheets/en/
Yes specific causes would be useful. We do already say:
"They most commonly occur in children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years.[1] Most seizures are less than five minutes in duration and the child is completely back to normal within sixty minutes of the event.[1][3]"
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:03, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
User:RichardGKnight have added details to the cause section. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:14, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 2 – 13 July 2017

Facto Post – Issue 2 – 13 July 2017

Editorial: Core models and topics

Wikimedians interest themselves in everything under the sun — and then some. Discussion on "core topics" may, oddly, be a fringe activity, and was popular here a decade ago.

The situation on Wikidata today does resemble the halcyon days of 2006 of the English Wikipedia. The growth is there, and the reliability and stylistic issues are not yet pressing in on the project. Its Berlin conference at the end of October will have five years of achievement to celebrate. Think Wikimania Frankfurt 2005.

Progress must be made, however, on referencing "core facts". This has two parts: replacing "imported from Wikipedia" in referencing by external authorities; and picking out statements, such as dates and family relationships, that must not only be reliable but be seen to be reliable.

In addition, there are many properties on Wikidata lacking a clear data model. An emerging consensus may push to the front key sourcing and biomedical properties as requiring urgent attention. Wikidata's "manual of style" is currently distributed over thousands of discussions. To make it coalesce, work on such a core is needed.


Editor Charles Matthews. Please leave feedback for him.
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doc_James/Archive_114&oldid=1146830536"