User talk:Downfromthedoor

Welcome!

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

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 30 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Head impact telemetry system page, your edit caused a PMC error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Head impact telemetry system. Thank you. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

OK - below is our standard greeting/orientation for people working on health or medicine.. (this is the short version)

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

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

Please keep the mission of Wikipedia in mind. We provide the public with accepted knowledge, working in a community.
We do that by finding high quality secondary sources and summarizing what they say, giving WP:WEIGHT as they do. Please do not try to build content by synthesizing content based on primary sources.
Please use high-quality, recent, secondary sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS; for the difference between primary and secondary sources, see the WP:MEDDEF section.) High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed. Please beware of predatory publishers – check the publishers of articles (especially open source articles) at Beall's list.
The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS. The section above the table of contents is called the WP:LEAD. It summarizes the body. Do not add anything to the lead that is not in the body. Style is covered in MEDMOS as well; we avoid the word "patient" for example.
We don't use terms like "currently", "recently," "now", or "today". See WP:RELTIME.
More generally see WP:MEDHOW, which gives great tips for editing about health -- for example, it provides a way to format citations quickly and easily
Citation details are important:
- Be sure cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books
- Please include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article, and please format citations consistently within an article.
- Do not use URLs from your university library that have "proxy" in them: the rest of the world cannot see them.
- Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
We use very few capital letters (see WP:MOSCAPS) and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities. Avoid overlinking!
Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
Please do have a read of WP:EXPERT, which will help you get oriented to some of the ways that writing in Wikipedia is different from the kind of writing that you are used to.
Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us! Please share these guidelines with other new editors.

– the WikiProject Medicine team Jytdog (talk) 07:02, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Downfromthedoor. I spend time working on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing, which is mostly about health and medicine. I am not an administrator.

Lots of people come to Wikipedia with some sort of conflict of interest and are not aware of how the editing community defines and manages conflict of interest. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, Downfromthedoor. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. Unmanaged conflicts of interest can also lead to people behaving in ways that violate our behavioral policies and cause disruption in the normal editing process. Managing conflict of interest well, also protects conflicted editors themselves - please see WP:Wikipedia is in the real world, and Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for some guidance and stories about people who have brought bad press upon themselves through unmanaged conflict of interest editing.

As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. At COIN, you wrote: No problem. I'm a co-developer of the technology, have closely collaborated in the basic research of head injury in sports / military with the institutions you mentioned, am a co-author for many of the publications referenced, and have been involved in nearly all aspects of the history described.

That is very helpful; to get the information needed for the disclosure that I will help you format, would you please disclose your employer? (just going one step at a time here) Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 07:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jytdog. I'm very familiar with COI and am happy to provide a disclosure and/or information desired to settle the copyright infringement claim.

I work for Simbex. Specific to the material provided in the contribution of interest (development history of HIT System technology, research variants, and basic research outcomes), funding was provided through many public entities to help provide insight into a significant health problem (i.e. sports concussion). My contributions were spurred by seeing incorrect and incomplete information within Wikipedia, conducted on my own time, and were not paid for by or for the benefit of my employer. It's simply a topic I know well. My standard disclosure statement is as follows: "Simbex receives support to conduct this research from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Department of Defense (DoD), and the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE). Simbex has a financial interest in the HIT System technology used to collect the biomechanical data reported in this presentation."

Before providing more information, I'd ask that you further describe your role in this matter. "I am not an administrator" is not very informative - at least to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ 70.91.136.249 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying! Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here.

First it is helpful to log in. I don't know that IP 70.91.136.249 is you (it could be anybody, right?)... but I will assume it is. (It is dangerous to make assumptions like that, but this one seems safe enough)

Next, in Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and so on, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense.

Also, at the end of the comment, please always "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit.

People signing in, and indenting and signing, are how we know who said what to whom and when.

Please be aware that logging in, threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).

I know this is unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Answering your question about "administrator" -- so most everybody in Wikipedia has just "editor" status, and can do all the basic stuff here, like creating a new page, editing text, etc. There are some people who we call "administrators" who have additional privileges here - they can delete pages and they can do things like block editors. (See WP:ADMIN).

In my work helping out with conflict of interest stuff, I tend to speak directly and simply, which can lead people to assume that I have some "special authority". I have no special authority. I do have a lot of experience in these matters so I write and act authoritatively, but that does not mean I have actual authority. I have been criticized some in the past for not explicitly letting people know that I have no special authority, so now I am careful to say that up front. Does that answer your question? Jytdog (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable. Sorry for the breach of etiquette. Downfromthedoor (talk) 15:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No big deal at all. There is a learning curve to working here.

I will take that, as you are OK with moving on.

So ... thanks for disclosing that you are a scientist working for Simbex.

You wrote My contributions were spurred by seeing incorrect and incomplete information within Wikipedia, conducted on my own time, and were not paid for by or for the benefit of my employer. It's simply a topic I know well.

I understand what you are saying there. I really do. (In the real world I work with scientists who are involved in companies - and really - I totally understand where you are coming from)

But that approach doesn't work in WP. COI is handled in the real world, by real world disclosure (you are the one giving the presentation or your name is on the paper, and you give the appropriate and standard COI statement). But in Wikipedia, articles are not signed (nor dated), and the reader has no way to know who wrote what unless they do a lot of digging.

So it is different here.

You are going to find these odd differences in a lot of places - there are some fundamental things here in WP that make working in Wikipedia very different from any kind of writing you have done before. Please have a read of User:Jytdog/How, where I try to explain how the foundations of this place have led to all kinds of things that seem bizarre or that people just never would normally consider, but make sense and become important, once you understand the foundation. (just like the signing thing)

In any case, what matters if that you have, and have disclosed, a COI for with respect to Simbex and related topics, as we define that in Wikipedia.

To finish the disclosure piece, would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:Downfromthedoor - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple like: "I am a scientist and work for Simbex, which developed the Head impact telemetry system. I have a conflict of interest with regard to that company and related topics" would be fine. If you want to add anything else there that is relevant to what you want to do in WP feel free to add it, but please don't add anything promotional about the company or yourself (see WP:USERPAGE for guidance if you like).

I have added a tag at Talk:Head impact telemetry system, so the disclosure is done there (we look for disclosure centrally, at the userpage, and locally, at pages where conflicted people are collaborating with other editors). Once you disclose on your user page, the disclosure piece of this will be done.

I have to go do real world stuff now, so will come back this evening and describe the "prior review" piece. In the meantime I hope you have time to read the orientation stuff at Jytdog/How and the material in the WP:MED welcome message above, so that once you are oriented to the COI process you already understand how we edit about biomedical science and health. Jytdog (talk) 16:06, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My user page has been updated as requested. Downfromthedoor (talk) 20:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That will do. I will open a new section for the last part of the COI stuff - the scrolling is getting a bit much. Jytdog (talk) 23:40, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the "prior review" step

Ok... As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also often driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to battles with other editors.

What we ask of editors who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to

(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page (this is already done at the HITS talk page); and

(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section on the talk page, put the proposed content there formatted just as you would if you were adding it directly to the article, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) place the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review. In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once. Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example. This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (There are good faith conflicted here, who follow the COI guideline, and conflicted editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the disclosure and prior review processes going forward when you want to work on any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 23:42, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this is waiting on a response from me or not, but, it should go without saying that I'm happy to follow whatever COI rules WP has in place. But, if I need to, I'm happy to follow COI rules WP has in place. I've disclosed any apparent conflicts as requested, and, at this point, I have no objections for others to edit the content I contributed. In fact, I thought that was the general approach of WP in the first place, so feedback is welcome. Downfromthedoor (talk) 19:53, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]