User talk:Northerncedar

Looking for help

I am working on a manual of style for dermatology-related articles at MOS:DERM, this after discussing it at the main MOS page. With that being said, I wanted to know if you would help me develop it, particularly the creation of a suggested list of sections for articles about cutaneous diseases (similar to what is found at the general medicine MOS, but tailored to cutaneous conditions, and better written)? I understand if you are busy, but wanted to see what you thought. Regardless, thank you for your work on wikipedia! ---kilbad (talk) 15:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Maldives Scuba Diving v. Scubaboard.com for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maldives Scuba Diving v. Scubaboard.com is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maldives Scuba Diving v. Scubaboard.com until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. /ƒETCH COMMS / 21:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mohsflattening.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mohsflattening.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 17:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiMedicine

Hi

I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new multinational non-profit organization we're forming at m:Wikimedia Medicine. Even if you don't want to be actively involved, any ideas you may have about our structure and aims would be very welcome on the project's talk page.

Our purpose is to help improve the range and quality of free online medical content, and we'll be working with like-minded organizations, such as the World Health Organization, professional and scholarly societies, medical schools, governments and NGOs - including Translators Without Borders.

Hope to see you there! --Anthonyhcole (talk) 07:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Margin Controlled Bread Loaf.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Margin Controlled Bread Loaf.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)

The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit)

Get free access to research!

...Support Open Access...

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 20:22, 16 June 2013 (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) 17:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Northerncedar. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mohs surgery

Hello Northerncedar,

You removed a photo from Mohs surgery that I took of my own ear after my own Mohs surgery and after discussing the matter with Doc James. You describe the photo as "highly deceptive". I had no intention to deceive. I readily admit that I am not an expert on the topic but I discussed my procedure in great detail with my surgeon. He never indicated that my procedure or its result was out of the ordinary or that the location on my ear presented special risks. My surgery took place nearly three years ago, and I have kept all of my follow-up appointments. I have had no recurrence of the cancer and my scarring is minor and barely noticeable. I consider my own personal outcome to be excellent, and am grateful to be healthy today.

I know that I am a sample of one and it would be best if we had dozens or a hundred photos to choose from, and could select an average or typical result. But as far as I know, my photo is the only available freely licensed photo of Mohs surgery, and I think that it is better than nothing. I look forward to our your response. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:16, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the image and would appreciate it if you would not remove it without discussing the matter on the article's talk page, and pinging me. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An arrow point to the part that was operated on would be useful. But yes would need further description regarding what is the issue. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of ear and its contributions

There is a fine balance between objective presentation of Mohs surgery, its values, and limitations . I have strived for years to keep biases, politics, and false statements from this page. The procedure has suffered a black eye from over marketing and is no longer respected because of such implications as the best , the only, and the one way to approach both basal and squamous cell cancer. Which it is not. The photo, although real. And correct in its application is not representative of the typical outcome of the cases where it is truly necessary. Simple excision of a small basal cell cancer with correctly placed margin will give equivalent results. It is the cure rate and narrow margins that is emphasized by frozen section. It irks me as a Mohs surgeon on the marketing push of some of my peers that there is no better approach that prevents me from posting my own cases. As the outcome has to do with the reconstruction and not the Mohs method . A well painted car does not speak of the motor. Nor does the scar speaks of the method. I strive to keep politics and commercialism out of this page since its early day when it was sabotaged daily by Mohs hater. Then the push to have only “one” ownership , then of politics of the societies . This photo is misleading . And patients AND doctors will pay the price for unrealistic expectations . Please do not repost it as it does nothing for the advancement of Mohs surgery. I have contributed over 80 percents if not more of the framework and references of this page. Northerncedar (talk) 02:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a catalog advertising different medical procedures. It's an ENCYCLOPEDIA. If the picture is of a surgery, it's fine. If you think Mohs Surgery has a black eye, find reliable sources and add it to the article. Otherwise leave it alone. --Tarage (talk) 02:53, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Mohs surgery. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 02:14, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Mohs surgery. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 02:37, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Northerncedar. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Northerncedar. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]