| Revision as of 17:37, 2 January 2017 editDoc James (talk | contribs)Administrators312,280 edits →Sinatra← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:37, 2 January 2017 edit undoDoc James (talk | contribs)Administrators312,280 edits →SinatraNext edit → | ||
| Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
| FYI, I opened a new FAC where you can place any suggestions/opposition/support, etc. Thanks! ] (]) 15:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC) | FYI, I opened a new FAC where you can place any suggestions/opposition/support, etc. Thanks! ] (]) 15:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
| == Sinatra == | == ] == | ||
| I'm wholly shocked that you've aided and abetted disruption on Sinatra's talk page. Still, '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 17:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC) | I'm wholly shocked that you've aided and abetted disruption on Sinatra's talk page. Still, '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 17:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:37, 2 January 2017
 | We have an offline version of our healthcare content. Download the app and access all this content when there's no Internet. (other languages) |
| Translation Main page | Those Involved (sign up) | Newsletter |
COPD editsThanks for reviewing my COPD edits. I appreciate it! I noticed that you prefer the ncbi link removed from the references. These are put in automatically from the cite function. I can manually remove them after I have added a citation, unless you have any other suggestions. I usually use the cite function to add a new journal, and generate it using the PMID. I have tried the DOI, but it adds the journal's publisher. Hope you are having a nice holiday! JenOttawa (talk) 12:36, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
ITN recognition for VSV-EBOV
On 28 December 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article VSV-EBOV, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:32, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Draft:Manual Ability Classification SystemHi! For the last month or so, I've been working on the cerebral palsy article, and I've noticed that you've been fixing up some of my work there. Thank you for that! I began working there because I was looking for information about CP, but couldn't find much. I've created a draft article on one of the classification systems commonly used in CP discussions these days at Draft:Manual Ability Classification System. I would really appreciate your ideas on this draft, because the articles on the Gross Motor Function Classification System and Communication Function Classification System are so different in their presentation and content. Could you please have a look at it and give me your thoughts? Sorry for the awkward timing, but this is when I'm free-ish to write. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 02:10, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
wp:leadHi Doc James, Thanks for your note on my page re the above. Sorry about that. It makes me wonder, though, whether perhaps this article might be better as two separate articles, one "toxoplasmosis in humans" and another "toxoplasmosis in non-human animals", as the current intro features not much overview of the non-human info. Also, as the 'research' section applies exclusively to humans, it seems to me to make sense following the human info better, not following the non-human info. Kind regards, --TyrS 03:16, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Medicine/App/Banner
Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Medicine/App/Banner
Reliable sourcesDoc, in reply to the message you left on my Talk page - I have ten years' experience editing Misplaced Pages and do not need patronizing "tips" on what consitutes a reliable source. The tone and content of your note imply that you view yourself as being entitled to dispense advice and corrections from on high. The point of contention here (i.e. the Syphilis article, and in particular the section on famous people who died of syphilis) involves historical facts for which 21st century scientific criteria of verifiability are not available. The judgment of competent biographers and historians in this case is just as reliable as peer-reviewed academic journals, if not more so. I think you need to do a bit of extra reading yourself: perhaps you could start with a lesson in epistemology, Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions for instance, or Foucault's Birth of the Clinic. You could supplement that with some background reading on hubris and nemesis. And then maybe cap the whole thing with a re-read of Misplaced Pages's policies on "ownership" of articles. -Wwallacee (talk) 11:43, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Relationship between hypermobility - Hypermobility (joints) -, and lax ligaments - Ligamentous laxityDear Doc James, I see we have an article on each of these topics, butI don't think they were linked to one another until just now, when I made each one into a See also. Should there be more discussion in each article about how they relate? I found the articles rather confusing, because I was not understanding whether they are separate conditions, or if not, how much they overlap, and how. Invertzoo (talk) 14:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Happy New Year Doc James!.jpg)
Happy New Year!
Hello Doc James:Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Misplaced Pages's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, JustBerry (talk) 00:33, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Down syndromeHappy New Year! I'm repeating here the reply below to your brief request for citation on the Down Syndrome page. Sorry, I thought I included an auto-reference to the original hard cover edition of The Panda's Thumb: 978-0393013801 The full citation should wind up reading: 1941-2002., Gould, Stephen Jay, (1980-01-01). The Panda's Thumb : More Reflections in Natural History. Norton. pp. 167–68. ISBN 9780393013801. OCLC 781219337. Sorry if my Wiki skills weren't up to posting that correctly. If you don't have a copy of the book handy to check my citation, you should be able to see it in full text on Google Books here, where it allows to expand out from snippet view. The point citation is to page 167-168, where Gould writes in 1980 that the term "Mongoloid" is still in common use in the United States and, after some equivocation, coming down in favor of replacing the term with "Down's Syndrome". The text you restored says the older terminology was abandoned in the early 1970's, and I believe this citation forms a valid basis for my revision, which I urge you to restore. Kindly also restore the references to Dr. Cookshank. The text you restored does what I consider to be a serious disservice to Dr. Down, by attributing to Down the racism that was only injected into Down's terminology 70 years later by Dr. Crookshank. Happy New Year. Sprucegrouse (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Sprucegrouse (talk) 14:57, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
What ref supported "Down was aware that they were not "real Mongols", and indeed inferred "the unity of the human species" from his observation that a disease process could result in the children of Caucasian parents presenting with facial features similar to those of another race. " Per this text "In 1921 F.G. Crookshank proposed that Down syndrome resulted from mixture of "Mongol blood" with European in the wake of the Mongol invasions, a false claim repeated for many decades." why are we using a 1924 book review? What ref supported "This manifestation of scientific racism was not thoroughly discredited until the trisomy 21 discovery in 1959 discussed above." Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Acne Vulgaris FAC Take 2FYI, I opened a new FAC where you can place any suggestions/opposition/support, etc. Thanks! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 15:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Frank SinatraI'm wholly shocked that you've aided and abetted disruption on Sinatra's talk page. Still, why am I surprised? Cassianto 17:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
|
.jpg)
