User talk:Floranerolia

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Floranerolia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

I also want to add two personal notes. First of all, when you want to tag something as needing a citation, please use template:fact. Instead of typing out "citation needed", all you need to do is add curly brackets around the word fact ({{fact}}). Next, I noticed at the D&C article that you removed citations and replaced them with fact tags. This seems quite odd because the material had citations to begin with.

Floranerolia: I removed a website (WebMD) as a citation as this is not a proper citation. Scientific references should be used as is the case for other scientific topics.

For isntances where you need to discuss or explain your changes in more detail, it always help to add an accompanying post on the article's talk page (click the "discuss" tab at the top of the article). This way you can communicate with other editors and they can figure out what you are trying to do. I have restored the WebMD content at the D&C article because it meets wikipedia's requirements for WP:ATT (including WP:V and WP:RS). Hope this helps, and if you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page, or use the help link from the side navigation bar.-Andrew c ^[talk] 15:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to e-mail me whenever you want, however, on wikipedia, it's easier to contact other users by using their talk pages. Similarly to how I am leaving you a message here on your talk page, you are welcome to add a note at User talk:Andrew c if you need to get in contact with me. I really appreciate your ambition, your expertise, and your promotion of strong sourcing. I also want to make it clear that someone in your position would clearly be an asset to wikipedia, and I want you to become an active, knowledgeable, and productive wikipedian. I just wanted to reply briefly to your message. Have you had a chance to read WP:RS or WP:V or WP:ATT? On wikipedia, we have standards for reliable sources. And in many cases, webpages can be used as reliable sources. I think the goal of replacing popular tertiary sources with more academic secondary sources is good idea.

Floranerolia: I disagree as it brings down the level of the entry. Scientific entries, in order to have any credibility at all, should have scientific citations as it shows that the contributors have at least a basic level of scientific knowledge.

However, there is no need to blank or remove sources that do meet our standards for citation (and I personally believe WebMD meets our criteria). There is no requirement to cite the original scientific paper over a secondary source, That's not to say you can't always improve on references (and of course I'd always encourage that). Finally, we have to also avoid original research (WP:OR) which we have to be careful of when discussing primary source to avoid a new synthesis or otherwise publishing ideas that have not been published before. If you have any more questions or concerns, I'd be glad to try and help however I am able.-Andrew c ^[talk] 03:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D&C

I think we may be looking at different studies. The reference currently used for the risk of adhesions is PMID 8473464, which does state they only studied sharp curettage. I was not able to find abstracts for the other studies you had cited. It does concern me that the information you provided differed from that provided by the World Health Organization and by the team of degreed medical doctors that write articles on WebMD. I've gone into more detail of changes I made to the dilation and curettage article on that article's talk page: Talk:Dilation and curettage#Edits 9-March 2008. Lyrl^Talk _C 15:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TB image

Please feel free. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 17:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asherman's syndrome

Excuse me for the late reply. I think you did a great job with the entry and we should consider nominating it in the Good Article process. I'm ready to help. Let me know if you're stil interested. NCurse _work 07:59, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]