User talk:PeggyDoll

Welcome to wikipedia. For more information about editing medical/anatomy content, see WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS. One general tip:

Don't tend to use the word "patient" on wikipedia... our readers are not assumed to be professionals nor patients... seems strange to avoid using the term patient at first but you get used to it... individuals, persons, people. Otherwise keep up the good work and thank you for your efforts. Lesion (talk) 01:42, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fehrenbach

Hi again,

Firstly, please stop deleting the infoboxes from articles. I assume this is mistake, but is the second time I have had to restore infoboxes after your edits.

I also note this edit you made to Fehrenbach and dental hygienist http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fehrenbach&diff=301686577&oldid=301683027 , http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dental_hygienist&diff=301686440&oldid=301683794

* Margaret J. Fehrenbach, RDH, MS (dental hygienist and oral biologist), noted dental hygiene educator, dental science writer, recipient of ADHA ''Award of Excellence in Dental Hygiene'', works in tobacco cessation efforts- see http://www.dhed.net/

* See website of noted dental hygiene educator, Margaret J. Fehrenbach, RDH, MS at http://www.dhed.net/adha.htm for more information on the dental hygiene profession.

And now you seem to be editing anatomy pages with hundreds of edits using the same source

<ref name=":0">Illustrated Anatomy of the Head and Neck, Fehrenbach and Herring, Elsevier, 2012, page 216</ref>

This is no proof that you are the person in Question, but please read WP:COI, and I can advise you that it is generally frowned upon to carpet bomb Wikipedia with a source that you are involved with. It is good to use a range of sources, and I personally would not use a source that I had published myself... Lesion (talk) 11:10, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not be better to enter into a discussion about this rather than continue to add content from the same source? I know you are aware of the talk page, since the edit history of your talk page shows you blanked it a few times. Lesion (talk) 11:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although you have not seen fit to comment, I see now that you are using other sources instead of this one source. Although the source appeared to be used repeatedly, it was over several pages and they were otherwise constructive edits, so I personally don't feel they should be reverted now. Lesion (talk) 02:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guidelines

A few useful guidelines at WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 01:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some useful tools to help with referencing WP:MEDHOW. Also we use very little bold per the WP:MOS. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 01:32, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dental caries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pulp (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is very helpful if you reply back to comments

Above I provided you a link to what section headings we typically use. We are a GENERAL encyclopedia and thus try to use easier words. Please do not change the heading "cause" to "etiology" again. Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:36, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep removing infoboxes?

Such as in this edit [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minor request about references

Hi PeggyDoll. I have noticed that you have done a great deal of work on anatomy related articles the last month or so. First of all; that is wonderful. Wikipedia have a lot of anatomy articles and not very few people who work on them. I know that you are somewhat new to Wikipedia and can see on your talkpage that a couple of other people have tried to steer you in "the right direction" so to speak. I hope you take kindly to these things (and my coming request). I know there is a lot of rules written on pages there is no way to know about until someone corrects you... and it may seem that people putting one down for doing volunteer work. That is not the case. ANY work is appreciated. That being said, everything on this site can and should be improved if possible.

My request (or tip of the day). I came across your edits on salivary gland, where you put in some references. Great! But could I please get to stop making space between the punctuation and the reference? One of those somewhat arbitrary wiki-rules is that there should not be any. If you look at e.g. large intestine the reference in the text is: bla bla bla.¹ and not bla bla bla. ¹

I know is seems like a small and somewhat stupid request... but my OCD and me would appreciate it :D I made the changes to salivary gland all ready so this just looking forward.

Have a nice day and happy editing (by the way; if you would like to reply to this message just hit "edit source" and write below. It looks a bit different from when you edit articles but is not harder in any way). Kind regards JakobSteenberg (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WT:DENT

FYI, wikiproject dentistry is slightly dormant, but there are a few editors around with interest in dentistry and related specialties. If you have any Qs or any issues, the talk page of that project would technically be the place to ask, and if no answer then the talk page of WT:MED. Lesion (talk) 23:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Opting in to VisualEditor

As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit ^beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 100 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, "MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-enable". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia from the Anatomy Wikiproject!

Welcome to Wikipedia from Wikiproject Anatomy! We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of anatomy articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are interested in editing anatomy 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 the WikiProkect Anatomy 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 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!
You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing anatomy articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article.
Lastly, why not try and strive to create a good article! Anatomical articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!

Feel free to contact us on the WikiProkect Anatomy talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. I wish you all the best on your wiki-voyages! --LT910001 (talk) 09:40, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation join the new Physiology Wikiproject!

Based on the long felt gap for categorization and improvization of WP:MED articles relating to the field of physiology, the new WikiProject Physiology has been created. WikiProject Physiology is still in its infancy and needs your help. On behalf of a group of editors striving to improve the quality of physiology articles here on Wikipedia, I would like to invite you to come on board and participate in the betterment of physiology related articles. Help us to jumpstart this WikiProject.

Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProkect Physiology 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 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!
You can tag the talk pages of relevant articles with {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=}} with your assessment of the article class and importance alongwith. Please note that WP:Physiology, WP:Physio, WP:Phy can be used interchangeably.
You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing physiology articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
Why not try and strive to create a good article! Physiology related articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!
Your contributions to the WikiProject page, related categories and templates is also welcome.
To invite other editors to this WikiProject, copy and past this template (with the signature):
- {{subst:WP Physiology–invite}} ~~~~
To welcome editors of physiology articles, copy and past this template (with the signature):
- {{subst:WP Physiology–welcome}} ~~~~
You can feel free to contact us on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. You can also put your suggestions there and discuss the scope of participation.

Hoping for your cooperation! Diptanshu^Talk 12:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language

	The Cure Award
	In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi, Doc James and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation

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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]