User talk:StevieNic
|
|
Here is a tool to help create references..[1]
References
[edit]Your editing of Anorexia Nervosa article
[edit]You removed a substantial amount of material from the Anorexia Nervosa (AN) article, I believe your editing greatly reduces the article's quality. Substantial edits should be explained Talk Pages and approved by other editors. With regard to the "relationship to Autism" section I added, I would have liked to have explained to you why is is important. I have instead reinstated the section on the "Relationship to Autism". You're welcome to discuss any further edits on the articles talk page. --Diamonddavej (talk) 17:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for your correspondence. Yes I have indeed done quite a lot of editing and pruning of the anorexia article. Whether it reduces the quality of the article I seriously doubt it. The article a while back was an absolute shambles. If you look back over the history of the article I think people have basically just added bits and pieces over the months, most of it was just anecdotal hearsay and superfluous..and it was certainly not suitable for a medical article.. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia and I think now it looks a lot tighter and reads with a lot more accuracy ..Best Wishes...StevieNic (talk) 18:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- I have looked at previous versions of the AN article, and it did become very messy after I added my section on autism and anorexia, I was not aware of how messy it got. But that said, I think you went too far in your edits and some important material was removed, especially the relationship to autism section, which is the basis of the Maudsley approach to treating AN - the only treatment that has substantial and long lasting benefits. --Diamonddavej (talk) 18:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Just to follow up on your recent reinstatement of Relationship to Autism Section and Yes, checking cited sources and other medical articles.(google.scholar & pubmed) and there does seem to be credible evidence (as per WP:MEDRS) that supports Family based treatments so this does deserve a mention in the main article. However we must take care not to give 'undue weight' and maintain a NPOV within WP guidelines. There is already mention of family based treatments in the 'Treatments' section.StevieNic (talk) 22:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Anorexia Nervosa
[edit]StevieNic (talk) 09:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi there!
Thanx for sniping that stray 'genes'. I would like to expand the genetics section even further, please give me your opinion on if you think this is needed.
Thanx again! Matterask (talk) 10:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
- By all means, it probably could do with a bit of expansion, but only if reliable sources can be cited and as long as the section doesn't get too bloated,StevieNic (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Problem user(s)
[edit]Hi StevieNic
I noticed you reverted a contentious mass edit at CFS earlier. Can you look into the following?
Recruitment, or reactivation here: [1] followed by:
- Mass revert at CFS[2]
- Deletion of other users's comments about KCCO's problematic editing at WPI:[3]
- Unsubtantiable claim that I attacked her, with a threat of blocking, on my userpage. [4]
As you're more involved with these issues, and WP procedures in general, you might know how to check whether these two accounts are in any way connected. Thanks, Sam Weller (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the communication..StevieNic (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Whittemore Peterson Institute
[edit]Steve, it's great to have a new pair of eyes looking at this article from a fresh perspective. Can I ask you to have a scan through the talk history on this. The article has been hacked around so much through Keepcalmandcarryon's mass reverts that we've lost some references. In the case of the the ref your just added, I've switched it to the later version of his article search the talk page for my post TSed "18:35, 6 February 2010" to see the discussion of this.
If you need electronic copy of any of the refs and can't access them then PM me and I'll email you a copy. -- TerryE (talk) 23:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Thanks for the communication. I shall have a look through to see if anything has been lost or misinterpreted..Thanks..StevieNic (talk) 10:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]I appreciate you reverting back the CFS page. I'm just trying to make the CFS page better and more accurate, and in so doing help patients to get the best information available. --sciencewatcher (talk) 18:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Removal of information from Chronic fatigue syndrome
[edit]I have reverted your removal of the information recently merged to Chronic fatigue syndrome. Please do not remove the information until we have a consensus. I have started a discussion on the talk page. I do not feel the discussion you pointed me is consensus enough, and there is no guarantee it would have been closed as delete in afd. Tatterfly (talk) 20:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- I call 7 to 1 a consensus, so therefore I've deleted it again..StevieNic (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Edit warring over a Proposed Deletion notice
[edit]- Wikipedia:Edit warring
- Wikipedia:Proposed deletion
- Cultural references to chronic fatigue syndrome (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Edit war over a Proposed Deletion notice one more time and you will lose your editing privileges. If a Proposed Deletion is challenged, Proposed Deletion is not the mechanism to use and the notice must not be restored. Uncle G (talk) 12:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- How can I be on a warning when I was just restoring an edit which was going against a consensus.?.If I have caused any problems then I do profoundly apologize..What more can I say. I hope you've issued warnings against other editors involved in this as well ??StevieNic (talk) 13:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- Never, ever restore a Prod notice that's been removed, it's that simple. Prod is only for non-controversial deletions, and this one is definitely controversial (even if only a minority dispute it). If a redirect is reverted, the solution is to go to AfD to get a proper resolution to the dispute, which I've now done. I should've done that in the first place instead of starting the discussion on the talk page. Fences&Windows 13:55, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response,,I will take that on board. Best Wishes..StevieNic (talk) 14:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
easily ?
[edit]About your edit. I'm confused by your edit summary, "I don't think the word 'easily' even comes into it". Could you elaborate? Thanks. Ward20 (talk) 20:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
- Apololgies...My mistake...I've just reverted it back again..I thought I was removing the word 'easily'.Instead I was just re-adding it.StevieNic (talk) 21:49, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Invitation
[edit]
If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in contributing more to medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (signup here).
WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Wiki Med
[edit]Hi
I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new non-profit organization we're forming at m:WikiMed. 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) 05:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
[edit] | The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit) Research tools and services Outreach Get involved  ...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)
The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.
The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.
Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.
BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors
[edit]Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Medical Translation Newsletter
[edit]
Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce
This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice.
note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject MedicineSpotlight - Simplified article translation
Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.
Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:
- WHO's list of Essential Medicines[5]
- Neglected tropical diseases[6]
- Key diseases for medical subspecialties like: oncology, emergency medicine (list), anatomy, internal medicine, surgery, etc.
We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.
What's happening?
- IEG grant
I've (CFCF) taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.
- Wikimania 2014
For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.
- Integration progress
There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish.
What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.
- Swedish
Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that.
Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May. - Dutch
Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie. - Polish
Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article.
(This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration - Arabic
The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.
- Integration guides
Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.
Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here [7]
News in short
- To come
- Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
- Proofreading drives
- Further reading
- Translators Without Borders
- Healthcare information for all by 2015, a global campaign
 |
Thanks for reading! To receive a monthly talk page update about new issues of the Medical Translation Newsletter, please add your name to the subscriber's list. To suggest items for the next issue, please contact the editor, CFCF (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Medicine/Translation Taskforce/Newsletter/Suggestions.
Want to help out manage the newsletter? Get in touch with me CFCF (talk · contribs)
For the newsletter from Wikiproject Medicine, see The Pulse
If you are receiving this newsletter without having signed up, it is because you have signed up as a member of the Translation Taskforce, or Wiki Project Med on meta. 22:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!