Jump to content

User talk:Doc James/Archive 170

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 165←Archive 168Archive 169Archive 170Archive 171Archive 172→Archive 174

Giant prostatic hyperplasia

Sir, As a practicing physician and a published author, I am unclear why my entry on GIANT PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA(GPH) was expunged/Reverted ? All of the citations were valid with PMID reference. Rather than start a Totally NEW WIKIPEDIA page, and listing by table ALL of the reported cases of GPH in the literature (less than 30 cases), I thought it appropriate to begin by cross referencing to the established page of BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA.

I have communicated via the TALK section of the Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, and added what is considered a Secondary source published 2020 on the subject.

I would appreciate your feedback in finding the appropriate home for this non-trivial subject matter...either it's original posting, or a new Wikipedia page ??

JamesRichardFishman (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User:JamesRichardFishman that was all simple based on primary sources. We should be using secondary sources. You also appear to be the author of one of the papers in question.
Here User:MartinezMD has also weighted in. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

The near term resolution to the GPH entry has occurred....sort of. Why I used my own article came SPECIFICALLY from the recommendation of User:MartinezMD >> Source #5 is still essentially a case report, and I don't think there is enough for another article. That being said, I can support the inclusion of this part: "BPH can be a progressive growth that in rare instances leads to exceptional enlargement. Prostates weighing more than 100 grams have been recorded in only 4% of men over the age of 70 years. In some males, the prostate enlargement exceeds 500 grams. This condition has been defined as giant prostatic hyperplasia(GPH)" without the aggrandizing weights. That should be a simple citation on the 500 gm sentence imho. MartinezMD (talk) 02:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC) And that is the language I used. Only to have the sentence trimmed further. Presuming that any effort to create a new Wikipedia page under the title "Giant Prostatic Hyperplasia" will be met with the usual scrutiny.

JamesRichardFishman (talk) 16:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I found a secondary source and replaced the primary sources with that. I doubt there are enough sources for an article specifically on GPH. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

COVID-19 Barnstar
I'm just adding onto the pile here, but your continued presence at COVID-19 pandemic and elsewhere makes a huge difference. Thanks for all your work! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks User:Sdkb it has been a good collaboration :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:52, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Today's "did you know"

James, pretty concerned about today's Did You Know on the main page regarding surgical masks. I suspect this will be misinterpreted as a reason not to wear masks and coopted by COVID denial movements. Is there anything to be done about this? I enjoy sandwiches (talk) 23:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@I enjoy sandwiches: I'm not seeing anything about masks on the front page; was it removed already? (please use {{ping|Sdkb}} on reply) {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
@I enjoy sandwiches: made a few small changes. Not sure if their is something specific you are concerned about? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:12, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
It looks like it was removed from the main page shortly after my comment on your talk page. Thank you for the revisions. I enjoy sandwiches (talk) 04:07, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

question

hi, i have this article https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Syndrome_de_glissement#

that i don't know to what link (for english article).

it it about https://www.earth.com/news/giving-up-life-death/ Vatadoshufrench 16:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=26375

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987718306145

it is about "psychogenic death" or "give-up-itis"

on searching on google, i had found only this article

i have found this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voodoo_death where it is talk about psychogenic death. BUT i am not sure it is in the same sense. please send me a notification if you reply.--Vatadoshufrench 18:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Vatadoshu interesting that they have a word in French for this. In English we would simple call it "giving up on life". It is were people simple loss the will to live. We also see it were people who are sick keep going as they want to reach an important event like a graduation or wedding and than following that die.
I am not aware of a word for this concept in English. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
ok, in english, the term seem to be "give-up-itis" , so i will create an articlefor that. And if there is a new term that appear, you can change the title of the article. ok? Like that, if people want to add text they can.(it canbe difficult for people to create article but less to just add text)--Vatadoshufrench 05:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
It would be more a syndrome than an "itis"... But without an official name I guess that is a start. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
ok, i have made an article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give-up-itis
redirection here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychogenic_death
but still, iwonder if "vodoo death is not the same as "Give-up-itis"?
because:
i have seen in introduction of the wikipedia "particularly noted in native societies, and concentration- or prisoner of war camps, " while "Give-up-itis" is in prisoner of war camp also...
i have some few sources that say that it is bthesame thing: [1]
  • like here:[2] ->'" This was sometimes called “voodoo death” "'
  • [3] ->"The syndrome is also known as voodoo death as it often affected native tribes people who believed they had been cursed "
so perhaps you could make a merge (i am not sure of the term, imeanfusion) to create one article with the two. (i will not do that, because it is not my langage base) andcreating only one redirection from the page [4]
if i read articles scientific , it seems the term the more used is "Give-up-itis", but "psychogenic death" is also used secondary (not in the title). The scientific source ncbi speak about "give up itis" say the terme in the title ([5])--Vatadoshufrench 07:24, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/955877116 redirection on the page "psychogenic death" reverted because "redirect to better page..." Vatadoshufrench 09:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) The concept sounds sort of similar to geriatric failure to thrive [6][7] (which we don't have an article on, but really should). But it doesn't seem to be quite the same thing. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
what pose me problem for merging is that Voodoo death is caused by fear (say wikipedia article); while "give up itis" is not link to fear but to " is a pathology where a person as a traumatic event, perceived to be no escape and over which a person has little or no influence". so not the fear. 10:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vatadoshu (talk • contribs)
Yes I consider voodoo death to be different. This is more geriatric failure to thrive IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Yet, the article has been delete and a redirection have been put instead of it. Vatadoshufrench 13:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

:D ok i know how to see a permanent link or an oldid. thanks! it is just i am tired about english wikipedia (reverted without discussion), so i will let you the potatoe. Just to note that the first ncbi source... i had always put it in the article see the reference number 2, the pdf.
have a good sleep. Vatadoshufrench 14:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
That oldid was for me rather than you... To help me find what was there previously when I have time to look at this further :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19

Dear Doc James, could please provide feedback regarding the following:

First, should the the article 2002–2004 SARS outbreak be renamed SARS outbreak or SARS epidemic to be consistent with the naming of COVID-19 pandemic?

  • If COVID-19 pandemic then SARS epidemic
  • If 2002-2004 SARS epidemic then 2019-20 COVID-19 pandemic

Either of the above two combinations are consistent. What's not consistent is having one article mention the time period (2002-2004 SARS outbreak/epidemic) while having the other article not mention the time period (COVID-19 pandemic). Both cases are single occurences so mentioning the time period as part of the article title ultimately doesn't matter but for the sake of consistency it should either be mentioned in both or neither. Thoughts?

Second, we test for HIV, we diagnose AIDS. Hence the title Diagnosis of HIV/AIDS. Therefore, shouldn't COVID-19 testing technically be SARS-CoV-2 testing or Diagnosis of COVID-19? I noted your comment on the talkpage stating that CT scans test for the disease however imaging is not specific and any findings would be used in conjuction with clinical features and SARS-CoV-2 testing to diagnose COVID-19. 156.204.222.123 (talk) 22:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I think Diagnosis of COVID-19 would be a good move.
And would support "2002–2004 SARS epidemic" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

LSD

Listen; reference LSD disambigeous; question to editors of topic pages..you omitted the fact that LSD is an artifical substance, known only by man as it is manmade, manufactured, altered substance, ripped assunder from naturally occuring organic living substance placed & created by GOD. The sustance, reformed & modeled in man's image is dead substance wherein lies nothing of GOD what so ever. Please correct your page & you have my permission to use/quote the passage I've written here & in reference, I am Elizabeth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.181.86.82 (talk) 12:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Not sure the request... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

autism

Hello. Can you answer this, please? 138.229.19.202 (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Per Talk:Autism#refuse_to_do_new_things
Here is a source that talks about "The extreme distress.. shown by many autistic people in response to changes in routine are rarely described in nonautistic individuals"[8]
And we already comment on it here with "Restricted interests: Interests or fixations that are abnormal in theme or intensity of focus, such as preoccupation with a single television program, toy, or game." Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Refuse to change routine, it means when they used to the same thing, they refuse to do another thing. But refuse to do things that they have never done, it's not exactly the same case. 138.229.19.202 (talk) 13:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
You able to find a good source that covers this? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Time to create Cytokine storm?

Hello, Doc James,

At en-wiki, where we have only one article and a redirect on the topic (Cytokine release syndrome, and Cytokine storm[redirect]), at fr-wiki, they have two separate articles: (fr:Syndrome de libération de cytokines, and fr:Choc cytokinique). Given the increased interest in cytokine storms due to Covid-19, I think it's high time we had a separate article for Cytokine storm. I'm willing to volunteer to do the fr->en translation, unless you think that's a bad idea for some reason. I'm aware of, but not proficient in, principles of WP:MEDRS, so if you have no objection, what I would propose to do, is to write up a translation of Choc cytokinique as Draft:Cytokine storm, and then at some point, just say "I'm done", and hand it off to you, or to your designee, or to the MED project. (Versions exist in German, Spanish, and other languages as well, but the French one is the most complete at 49kb, and also has 48 references.) The evaluation of references will not be hard by English-speaking habitués of MEDRS, as almost all the references in the French article are from English sources. (My intro to the topic was at "nawlinsdoc"'s excellent post at TexAgs, and I branched off from there to Randy Cron and elsewhere.) I'm open to other ways of doing this, including collaborating with a MEDRS-familiar en-wiki editor, or other solutions. Needless to say, as a Draft, anyone could jump in whenever. Thoughts? Mathglot (talk) 10:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

No strong feelings. As "immediate-onset CRS" I do not think it is unreasonable to cover it at CRS. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Canadian accent

Seeing that you're Canadian, so do you pronounce the word "law" and the word "la" (note) exactly the same way? 138.229.19.202 (talk) 15:38, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

No... La ends at a higher pitch. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm not talking about the pitch, I'm talking about the vowel. 138.229.19.202 (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

"law" and "la"

Hello Doctor James, do do you pronounce the word "law" and the word "la" (note) exactly the same way? I'm not talking about the intonation, I'm talking about the vowel. 138.229.19.202 (talk) 14:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

question

HI just to have another point of view... do you think these 2 publications are valable?

(since a contributor revert me saying it has no value) --Vatadoshufrench 15:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Vatadoshu do we have secondary sources on this? My first though regarding "In general, females prefer a higher room temperature than males in home and office situations" how much of that relates to clothing expectations? Men wear suits, which are very warm, and women less so. Thus we have so many over airconditioned buildings and thus we have buildings set too cold in the summer just to suit the men in suits which consumes a lot of energy.
These are primary sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

thanks. primary source should be okay, i should not be reverted if i add primary sources Vatadoshufrench 14:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC) and yes there are secondary sources on this. but it seems that each time i write on english wikipedia, eah time i am reverted.

Vatadoshufrench 14:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Those are popular press sources. I personally would want to see something better. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
most of time studies have no pdf free. is there something that permit to see free detailled pubmed with wikipedia? (not only the abstract) Vatadoshufrench 17:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
One can ask at the resource desk. Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request What are you looking for? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

thanks. for now i search nothing. but sometimes i need. (passed i used sci hub, but now the access is blocked in france). Vatadoshufrench 17:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Yah not sure how they have blocked it in France. I would imagine their are ways around. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! We have compiled some guidance for new healthcare editors:

Hello dear friend.

I didn't know one could remove legitimate sources, because they back up statements which you one doesn't agree with. Furthermore, "trimming really old primary sources and a search link" in the form of removing a source from 2018 ([1]) which gives a realistic estimate of a product's duration of action, in order to reinstate the previous estimate according to which BZD give effects which last for "up to a day" is ridiculous. If some people still think duration of action is determined by elimination, rather than distribution, they should at least not prevent other people with more information from correcting errors.

It's OK though I guess I won't pass on those guidances for "new healthcare editors" and stay on my side of Wikipedia in the future, where I've contributed greatly without ever offending anyone with sources deemed unworthy, simply because they are "old" (2018 was so long ago...) or back up statements which are not universally accepted (like a lot of data about medication, btw)

cf: [9] =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KRaikkonen01 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

User:KRaikkonen01 This is a search link https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/lorazepam not a single source. And what appears on that page changes as time goes on.
The link in question says "The usual duration of sedative effects of lorazepam is 6 to 8 hours; however, some degree of unsteadiness and sensitivity to the CNS-depressant effects of other drugs (e.g., opioid analgesics prescribed for postsurgical pain control) may persist for as long as 24 hours."
We already say some effects may last for up to a day.
This is a primary source from 1988 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3280615 and this is one from 1983.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6661348
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/lorazepam

Covid-19 Pulse oximeter testing section

Hi Doc, You removed the pulse oximeter section from COVID-19_testing#Test_methods since it is not diagnostic.

However it is a good early warning test.

Personally I had a bilateral pulmonary embolism a few years ago, I just thought I was unfit and increased my exercise once I had recovered from the fever and feeling like death on my flight back from Kenya. When I eventually went to ER about 10 days later on the basis of some mild persistent chest pain on a day I was stressed, the Oximeter indicated that it was lung rather than heart and CT scans diagnosed it. I was put straight into intensive care, a little oxygen and I felt back to normal and they threw me out the next day as started doing yoga and calisthenics in the ICU.

Covid hypoxia is much sneakier than a pulmonary embolism, and by the time a person is aware in those countries like the UK with no testing prior to requiring hospital admission significant damage has been done to the lungs resulting in terrible recovery rates.

UK medic's are personally checking their oxygen levels on a regular basis (according to their blogs), and I suspect anyone else that is informed is as well. I am.

Pulse oximerer's allow for early in the field testing, and low oxygen Covid or otherwise is something that needs to be quickly diagnosed irrespective of the cause. This is particularly important for those areas like Western Europe and the US were there is no program of test, track and trace, and the testing system has been overwhelmed. It is also important in the 3rd world where there are no test kits because of demand from the 1st world.

I hope you will reconsider and put the section back in making clear that it identifies a significant health issue, and that any significant drop in Oxygen levels requires further diagnostic tests.RonaldDuncan (talk) 10:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

One can see low O2 in COVID19. But it is not diagnostic of the condition, it is just a potential sign similar to coughing or a fever.
WHO is supplying test kits to many countries. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
I agree that low O2 is one of the symptoms, however it is different to coughing or a fever since both of these are apparent to the patient whereas low O2 is not apparent to the patient until it is too late to treat, and is a sign of a serious case of COVID19 that is resulting in lung damage.
The WHO has a limited number of kits and places like India are having to ration test kits because of the demand even when they have successful management. [10]
Checking with a pulse oximeter is a low cost field triage system, and I think is helpful to the article. RonaldDuncan (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Just had a look at the Russian Ministry of Health Guidelines for outpatient treatment of mild cases COVID-19. They use 95% SpO2 as the cut off for mild cases. Mild is over 95% SpO2. The guidelines were published on 17 April and are available here [11] (google translate works well on them)RonaldDuncan (talk) 12:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Low O2 sats is used to determine when someone with the disease should be admitted to hospital for oxygen therapy. It does not make the diagnosis one way or the other. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:25, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Agreed - is there another section of the article re monitoring that would be more suitable - since Silent Hypoxia is one of the things that distinguishes Covid-19 form other flu like viruses. Thanks for your time.RonaldDuncan (talk) 01:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
We see people with hypoxia without significant symptoms of SOB at rest in a number of conditions. We really need to stick with sources per WP:MEDRS and not the popular press. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:00, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

TM

Dr. James, you are mistakenly and erroneously conflating different types of meditation as sources to dispel the effects of Transcendental Meditation (TM), as opposed to Vipassana or Mindfulness Meditation (MM). Please read through even just the abstract of the articles to ensure the veracity of this claim. What you are posting has absolutely nothing to do with TM. There are three general types of meditation. They are: Open-Monitoring, Focused Attention, and Transcending--which is TM. The sources you used are on Open-Monitoring and/or Focused Attention not TM. I encourage you to look up the peer-reviewed literature on these subject matters. There is none within any of the publications you referenced. In fact try searching: "Transcendental Meditation" into any peer-reviewed journal publication(s). You will find that there is none within the scientific literature that you cite with regard to TM. Again, they are studies on different types of meditation and how they can affect health. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tactics117 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Those references did cover TM. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:00, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi there! I just wanted to say thank you for this edit. Yes I know it was a one-liner from over a year ago but I actually somehow was not aware that template existed previously. I'm just getting back into editing Wikipedia after many years of inactivity so still re-learning the ropes here. Cheers! Paradoxsociety 21:05, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Paradoxsociety no worries, great to see you back. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Advocacy

See [12] - that user has very few edits and is clearly vested in the "disease only" view of CFS. WEe've been holding this back, following RS, for 15 years. It looks to me as if advocates have got to CDC, as they did with Morgellons (which was found, after years of investigation, to be delusional, exactly as we always said it was). Guy (help!) 10:57, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Entry inhibitor article

You up to the challenge of updating Entry inhibitor? It could use an expert. :) 2001:56A:F9B1:AE00:8049:C799:FA15:B46B (talk) 02:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Generally I work more on articles about diseases and specific medications rather than families of medications. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:05, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Glossary of medicine

Please have the medicine project expand the Glossary of medicine for all the students out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.216.159.194 (talk) 14:53, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

User:LearnMore is doing impressive work. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

COVID-19 Barnstar
Thanks for all your COVID related work, especially your patient, careful explanations about sourcing at the talk pages. Capewearer (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks User:Capewearer. It has been a good collaboration. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:27, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

CBS Sunday Morning

Hi, Doc James,

Just saw you on CBS News Sunday Morning, talking about editing on COVID-19. Great job! Liz Read! Talk! 14:49, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Liz. Had the opportunity to be a spokesperson for all the great work people are doing here :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Big congrats![13]--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:48, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
I saw just a short clip of the presentation and it was indeed excellent. Doc James represents our medical community extremely well! Can I find the interview somewhere on the web? Gandydancer (talk) 16:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Gandy. The footage was mostly shot during a video conference with CBS. They than edited it to what we see here. Not sure anything more has been published. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Incessant reverting

Information icon Hello, I'm Doc James. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:24, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

James, your policing of the interpretation of the subjective and ambiguous term "constructive" doesn't seem to help with the vision of Wikipedia or be relevant to the changes made to the Autism page. Can you clarify why you feel the change is not constructive? Please consult with me before undoing valuable contributions I have invested my time in.

You changed text to what the references specifically do not support.
Specifically you changed "Autism is associated with a combination of genetic and environmental factors"
Which was supported by the reference in question to
"Autism is hereditary and previous associations with environmental factors have been disproved or debunked."
Which is not supported by the reference in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

James, As I said over email, I will provide more contributions to the page including more sources as reference / supporting evidence. Kindly only revert changes if you have a valid reason for doing so, my time is valuable. Also note that reverts should not be made out of disagreement and in disagreement evidence prevails, so If you disagree with my edit the onus is on you to provide evidence. In this case please provide evidence that Autism is anything other than a genetically inherited state. I don't think it's your area of expertise, so I recommend you leave it and let experts continue to brush up the page.

The original content was supported by the references provided. The changes you make were not. Your claim of expertise is neither here no their. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I see you have reverted the edit again which is pathetic. I will make a formal complaint on the matter.

Dangibas has persisted after I messaged their talk and article talk, so I have submitted an ANI. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Sandy for taking care of this. They were initially here to promote themselves (I have trimmed a number of spam links to sites they run). Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikihistory

Hello!

All the tools will soon get transferred to new domains, see wikitech:News/Toolforge.org. WikiHistory already did this change. If the Firefox plugin NoScript is installed, you should allow scripts from the new domain toolforge.org.

BTW: There is new page, where you can see all the articles with main contributions of a given user, I already prepared your data. As you can see, it took 3 days for your account to finish, so it is a little bit slow, but you seem to edit really large articles. For users with a fewer number of edits, it still may take a few hours. So please do not enter user names just for fun, start page is: https://wikihistory.toolforge.org/main.php?wiki=enwiki&lang=en --Wurgl (talk) 13:31, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up User:Wurgl Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Doc James. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Ward20 (talk) 11:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration proposed decision posted

The proposed decision in the Medicine arbitration case has been posted, and contains one or more remedies or findings of fact which relate to you. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:03, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Please block me "Doctor" James

"Doctor" James, please block me. I do not know where you got your so-called education, but based on your false claims, lies, conflation with other modalities of meditation, is that it was from an unaccredited university--like Trump's. You do not act in good faith, and are the exact opposite of a scientist. You do not look at the peer-reviewed literature on Transcendental Meditation (TM) and you are just flat-out ignorant on the subject matter. Or perhaps, you are deliberately lying? In either case, I do have a doctorate and I do not want to waste my time on some charlatan that continually reverts back any and all changes to (TM) because you do not personally agree with it. I too have some misgivings about (TM), like cost, secrecy and some individuals deification of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, but you just continually obfuscate. And for me that is a deal-breaker. The irony is that you ignorantly/arrogantly flagged me for changing things too much (which I did not do), but in actuality it is you that is using outdated sources, and what is worse--many of your "sources" are not on (TM). You are so daft that you do not even understand the different types of meditation, such as: Mindfulness, Focused-Attention, etcetera. No wonder you have had to block so many hundreds--even thousands of people, because you are bad actor and a fraud. I would recommend getting a real education. You are a disgrace to scientists everywhere. You know as much on meditation as Trump knows about running a country; which is to say, none at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tactics117 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Nice to meet you Tactics117, clearly you are not having a good day today, that is unfortunate, perhaps tomorrow will be better. Doc James cannot block you as he is WP:INVOLVED. You can request an uninvolved admin to WP:BLOCKME. The transcendental meditation article attracts pseudoscientific POV pushing. Your edits appear to be POV pushing a WP:FRINGE type of WP:POV. You also appear to be an WP:SPA and to have a strong emotional connection to the article topic so you may have a WP:COI, however if you are not an SPA then you should consider editing in articles which are less controversial and less stressful.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 23:22, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

BRIDGEi2i Analytics

Hi

I am a keen AI (Artificial Intelligence) researcher with MACS (Member of Australian Computer Society) credentials. I follow many AI organisations such as iTechArt Group, SPEC INDIA, Altar.io and MobiDev. One of the earlier established AI powered companies was BRIDGEi2i Analytics. In March this year I noticed they had disappeared from Wikipedia and I then found that the company had been moved to draft. I can see the reasons why and it is a pity if the editor didn’t disclose his remuneration in violation of WP:PAID. I have cleaned up the article and would request that you now move it back into mainstream WP. I am a volunteer just like you and I could do this move myself but would like your cooperation and it would be good if you do the move.

Thanking you

Yours sincerely

Michael Bark

PuraVida18 (talk) 03:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine closed

An arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles. Any uninvolved administrator may apply sanctions as an arbitration enforcement action to users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.
  • CFCF is reminded to avoid casting aspersions and similar conduct in the future.
  • Doc James is prohibited from making any edits relating to pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing in the article namespace.
  • QuackGuru is indefinitely topic-banned from articles relating to medicine, broadly construed.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 15:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine closed
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doc_James/Archive_170&oldid=1140662592"