User talk:Ms12334

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Ms12334, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains^(talk) 21:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tip of the day...

Lead Section Size

The lead section of a Wikipedia article is the section before the first heading. The table of contents, if displayed, generally appears between the lead section and the first subheading.

Rule of thumb: If a topic deserves a heading or subheading, then it deserves short mention in the lead.

The lead section should contain up to four paragraphs, depending on the length of the article, and should provide a preview of the main points the article will make, summarizing the primary reasons the subject matter is interesting or notable. The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, should be written in a clear and accessible style, should be carefully sourced like the rest of the text, and should encourage the reader to want to read more. The following table has some general guidelines for the length of the lead section:

< 15,000 characters	medium size	> 30,000 characters
one or two paragraphs	two or three paragraphs	three or four paragraphs

Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip

Summary essay:

WP:CREATELEAD

Welcome to Wikipedia from the Medicine WikiProject!

Welcome to Wikipedia and WikiProject Medicine

Welcome to Wikipedia from WikiProject Medicine (also known as WPMED).

We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of medical articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are interested in editing medical articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, a few things that may be relevant to editing Wikipedia articles are:

Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on our talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the WPMED talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
Sourcing of medical and health-related content on Wikipedia is guided by our medical sourcing guidelines, commonly referred to as MEDRS. These guidelines typically require recent secondary sources to support information; their application is further explained here. Primary sources (case studies, case reports, research studies) are rarely used, especially if the primary sources are produced by the organisation or individual who is promoting a claim.
The Wikipedia community includes a wide variety of editors with different interests, skills, and knowledge. We all manage to get along through a lot of discussion that happens under the scenes and through the bold, revert, discuss editing cycle. If you encounter any problems, you can discuss them on an article's talk page or post a message on the WPMED talk page.

Feel free to drop a note on my talk page if you have any problems. I wish you all the best on your wiki voyages! PeaBrainC (talk) 15:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links Suggestion

Hi Ms12334

I came across your contributions to Arrhythmia and Atrial Fibrillation in which you added to the external links section. Looking through your overall contributions you have added external links to MedlinePlus to many pages. Thanks for contributing! There are certain ways that the Wiki community has evolved which have led to many guidelines and policies (which can be a bit overwhelming for those newer to editing). There's even a separate guideline covering the use of external links which can be found at WP:LINKSTOAVOID. Links to external sites like MedlinePlus should generally be in the form of inline cites to support specific text in the body of the article rather than an isolated link to the website without context.

Please take this as constructive feedback. Happy editing! PeaBrainC (talk) 15:31, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. I don't have any medical background. I am not very sure if Wikipedia is for physicians to get information. Wikipedia could be a place for common people to get general information about conditions so that they could ask more intelligent/specific questions when we see doctors? I added MedlinePlus pages because it explains conditions in layman's terms in the summary section.Ms12334 (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In many of these instances, MedlinePlus is already a reference for the article. The reality for Wikipedia readership is that most visitors are satisfied with the content of the Lead of the article, and perhaps certain sections, without visits to the references or External links. The leads, and articles in general, are supposed to be written to be understood by readers who do not have a healthcare-related education. While your intent is admirable, I hope you can consider more productive improvements to medical/health articles rather than going to article after article after article after article to add this as an External link. What you are doing does no harm, but in reality it has an at best modest improvement to the articles. David notMD (talk) 16:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to have a short summary section at the top of an article?Ms12334 (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I meant a summary without going into too technical, followed by detailed description of a condition. Ms12334 (talk) 17:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In most of the articles where you've added a link there's *already* a link to the medline article. Please at least check before adding them. Mvolz (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. But they are different pages.Ms12334 (talk) 17:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Leads are supposed to be summaries. Are there specific articles for which you believe the Leads are not optimal? Keep in mind that references are not required in Leads as long as when the content is expanded upon in the body of the article, appropriate references are there. David notMD (talk) 18:15, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're right Ms12334, Wiki pages are supposed to be written in a way that can be understood by those without a medical background. The lead (the first few paragraphs before getting to the first proper heading) in particular should serve as a summary of the whole article written in language that can be understood by all who have a reasonable level of education and grasp of the English language. If you find articles that do not fit this description, please change them to make them less technical and more understandable. Many of us (on Wiki and in the real world) write in a way that assumes all have the knowledge that we do and use technical jargon without explaining what it means. It will be of great service to the Wiki if you can help address this. Have a look at the Wikipedia manual of style for medical articles WP:MEDMOS for ideas about how medical articles should be structured, and then be bold and try to make articles more understandable. If others disagree with your changes they will revert them back, and you can use this as way to learn by discussing what could be better on the articles' talk pages. PeaBrainC (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to use the Talk page first. Thank you.Ms12334 (talk) 23:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All this aside, I concur with your removal of dead and inappropriate External links at Gallstone. David notMD (talk) 21:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We have {{Medical resources}} Maybe we could put them all in there? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:57, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. I will check it later. Sorry my current work schedule is pretty hectic. Ms12334 (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]