User talk:Zad68/Archive 2013 Aug

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


DYK RfC

  • As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions03:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

Your GA nomination of Low back pain

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Low back pain you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Biosthmors -- Biosthmors (talk) 07:26, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Edits to Burn

I recently experienced Second degree burns. I have a month of first hand experience and hours of appointments with burn specialists for what I wrote about. Am I unable to contribute that? Bbunkers (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bbunkers, sorry to hear about your burns! The answer to your question, asking if it's not OK to add content based solely on your own experiences, is basically: Correct, you really cannot do that. Wikipedia does not consider the individual personal experiences of editors to be sufficient reliable sourcing for article content, please see the Wikipedia policies regarding no original research. Instead, the kinds of information you were adding need to be supported by published reliable sources. That particular article you were editing, Burn, was recently promoted to good article status. Everything in it is sourced to high-quality reliable sources like recent literature review articles and textbooks. What you were adding might be true, but you'd need to find high-quality reliable sourcing to support it. Please see WP:MEDRS to review what kinds of sources Wikipedia values as acceptable to support article content covering biomedical information. If you have any questions I can try to help if you'd like. Zad68 14:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Rather than edit warring alternative medicine please take it to the talk page. Wkerney (talk) 13:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

ADHD

Hi ZAD. :) I have pretty much finished addressing your GA comments. If you would like to review my fixes you can when you have the time.--MrADHD | T@1k? 09:41, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks MrADHD, will review. Zad68 14:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

Developmental coordination disorder

Hi ZAD,

I noticed you have been involved the ADHD article. Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) has some overlap ADHD, and I was wondering if you could take a quick look at the DCD article. I have moved the article to its correct name, and added as many medical citations as I can to support much of the current content. As you are probably aware my copy editing skills are next to zero, so I limit myself to finding supporting citations. Hope you can help dolfrog (talk) 16:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Barn star

an award from MrADHD dated 23:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC) that was here has been moved to my barnstars list

Sinclair Method

Hi Zad--I was wondering if you might take a look at Sinclair Method and see if you have some suggestions for improving it. The problem is that virtually all of the information comes from a book from a proponent of the treatment and a couple of scientific papers. There is a patent involved as well, but it has expired by now. Some of my concerns are in the article talk page. One primary issue is that, with this treatment, "success" is defined in ways that are different from typical alcoholism studies as this treatment requires drinking to work and the goal is less heavy drinking as opposed to the normal "days of abstinence" (which makes no sense for this treatment given that it requires drinking). Anyway, advice would be appreciated. I have no interest in deleting the article but some more independent sources would help a lot. Best-- Desoto10 (talk) 23:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Appreciate your asking! I will look but it may take me about a week to get to it, I am traveling all this week and Wiki time is limited. If the sourcing issues you're describing are present the article will indeed have problems. I just took a look at PubMed and Google Scholar and cannot find independent sourcing... work is needed here, possibly AFD, will look. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Zad68 02:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
No hurry, it has been festering for some time. It is an interesting topic and may reflect the mixed effects and commercial uptake of naltrexone. Desoto10 (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

(outdent) I have some familiarity with this article having done some editing to it years ago - I do think that it is a notable enough article. Zad, I actually put forward the article for deletion under my old username here, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sinclair_Method and the result was speedy keep. I actually ended up changing my mind and withdrawing my nomination for deletion after reading of the notability from other sources and also the method does have some scientific credibility and is not 'out there' or particularly fringey even though it is not widely used in mainstream alcohol dependence treatment.--MrADHD | T@1k? 19:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks MrADHD... I looked at that AFD discussion and I can't say I am convinced yet based on the sources provided. I think the sourcing standard has gotten higher and the links provided are dead, were not independent or were of questionable quality. Are there better sources? Will take a closer look. Zad68 22:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Google books is probably where the best sources are going to be found. The article does need attention and sourcing needs improving on for sure. The article will never be able to be referenced to the standard of say fluoxetine, ADHD or major depressive disorder as it does not have the very high levels of notability of these article subjects and probably will always be a Start or C class article unless an enthusiastic dedicated editor gave it a lot of work maybe a B class article.--MrADHD | T@1k? 19:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Another option would be to merge with redirect into Naltrexone, for example... we should take this to the article Talk pages at this point. Zad68 01:16, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Euphemism

Hi Zad68. I would not quite call "claim the life of" an euphemism, but that is besides the point. Your solution addresses both issues so it obviously a better solution. I admit, when I reversed the word order I never saw that I could have inverted "died into "killed" - and that, from me, known to rant at news readers for forever talking about people "dying" in violence, instead of the obvious, "being killed". Well done.

PS: Have just returned from Malawi (known for cerebral malaria) and came here to read about symptoms of that specific strain. However, there isn't a section on it, there are references here and there. Don't you feel the loose bits should be aggregated into a section on "cerebral malaria"?

Also, the word "severe" is used a number of times, then used in the same (last) paragraph under "signs and symptoms", followed by "falciparium malaria", followed by "cerebral malaria, but without it coming across that we are talking about the same thing. Then way further down, the last sentence under "classification" finally says that "severe malaria" is the same as "cerebral malaria. Which raise a secondary issue - if "severe" is a synonym for "cerebral", then the use of the term throughout the page creates uncertainty as to whether it is being used to mean "serious" or "cerebral". Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 11:15, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Rui Gabriel Correia. Regarding the (possibly) euphemistic language, one thing you might not have been aware of is that Doc James is very closely involved with the translation of WP:MED articles to other languages. The translation process works better when plain, straightforward language is used, so Doc often make those sorts of changes.

I think it's a good idea to organize related information into sections in articles, like you're describing, and will look at that and the use of "severe". Zad68 16:10, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

Interview request: Your interactions with new editors in Wikipedia

I'm contacting you about a study that I'm running with TheOriginalSoni exploring newcomer mentorship activities in Wikipedia. I'd like to ask you a few questions about your interactions with newcomers and to explore how a tool like WP:Snuggle might make your work easier. The interview and demo session will take 30 minutes to an hour depending on how much time we spend discussing things. If you're interested, let me know. If not, disregard this message and I won't bother you again.

Thanks for your consideration. --EpochFail (talk • contribs) 18:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Million Award

an award from Khazar2 dated 01:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC) that was here has been moved to my barnstars list

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award.

Collapsed userbox info so I don't have a userbox on my Talk page

You're also welcome to display this userbox:

This editor won the Million Award for bringing Circumcision to Good Article status.

For reaching the highest tier of this award, you've also been added to the Million Award Hall of Fame. If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it!

Thanks again for helping so many readers worldwide; your contributions make a tremendous difference. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey Zad, I think I already gave you one barnstar for this article, but you deserve this, too. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Khazar2 I am honored! And that's a fantastic idea for an award. I think it's very important that widely-read core encyclopedic topics have good articles, and this sort of recognition will help motivate work on them. Zad68 02:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! That's the plan. I admit so far it's about half Avril Lavigne and half periodic table. But as long as that second half is covered, I'm happy! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Lol... looking at this I guess I should be spending my editing hours on Twerking! Zad68 02:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Your free Cochrane account is on its way!

Please fill out this very short form to receive your free access to Cochrane Collaboration's library of medical reviews: completed.

If you have any questions, just ask me. Cheers, Ocaasi 13:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Happy dance!! Thanks! Zad68 13:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

More malaria

Hi. I thought the guys who quoted a source about the use of a fungus that is sprayed on mosquito net had got the wrong end of the stick - See Beauveria bassiana, but looks like that is what the source says: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/10/science/10mosquito.html?_r=0 I find it an odd idea, spraying nets with something that will take forever to kill the mosquitos. For starters, if a mosquito lands on a net, there is hardly any contact with the net. If it tries to squeeze through the mesh, perhaps then, yes. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

GA review

I'll be making more progress on the GA review this weekend! Thanks for your patience and hard work. Biosthmors (talk) 15:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

And thanks for the review! I'd really like to get the review wrapped up by the middle of next week. Do you think that'd be possible? How close do you think we are? Zad68 16:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to be optimistic and say we're halfway done and that it's possible. I should be able to update you by the end of the weekend. I expect I'll also want to check 10 to 20 inline citations for text-source integrity, which may prompt me to ask for you to email me a PDF or three if I don't have access. Do you think that could work? Best. Biosthmors (talk) 16:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good! Zad68 16:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zad68/Archive_2013_Aug&oldid=1168310026"