Revision as of 18:58, 26 February 2020 editDoc James (talk | contribs)Administrators312,294 edits →Cancer Worksheets← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:28, 27 February 2020 edit undoAtsme (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers42,819 edits →And the patient said...: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
:::Just the fastcompany article and the website right now afaik. ] (]) 00:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC) | :::Just the fastcompany article and the website right now afaik. ] (]) 00:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC) | ||
::::Maybe something more general like ]? Not sure if there is evidence for that. ] (] · ] · ]) 18:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC) | ::::Maybe something more general like ]? Not sure if there is evidence for that. ] (] · ] · ]) 18:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC) | ||
== And the patient said... == | |||
Have another on me! ] --] <sub>]</sub> ] 14:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:28, 27 February 2020
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 |
Electronic cigarette Article Changes, ReversionsAs I understand it (and I'm novice but not naive) your reasons for an edit must be stated. The fact that you deleted another contribution at the same time that you "updated a reference" and changed it's preceding wording is questionable, i.m.o. Additionally, I must have failed to see where the electronic cigarette article was noted as a health or medical article, but if it is and you are implying by the note you left on my Talk page that the additional paragraph and reference (in a different section than the "updated" ref change you made) was not a "high-quality" source, then it would have been proper to note that, rather than omit mentioning it. I see by the Electronic Cigarette edit history that between you and QuackGuru (who for all I know may be the same person) are the defacto editor-owners of most of the article. And, it's a total literary and organizational disaster, with NPOV issues. Calling it a medical article for the sake of obfuscation when undoing citations is disingenuous, at best. I'm a retired technical writer & editor, so I'll be around quite a bit in an effort to restore my previous faith in WikiPedia, fwiw. Page monitoring against vandalism is one thing, Gatekeeping another.
IntroductionThank you for reviewing my edits on the buprenorphine and the coronavirus articles. I just wanted to introduce myself as someone who also believes in reducing misinformation out there. While I can't watch articles daily, I hope to continue contributing to medical articles. That being said, if you feel there's something that's of urgency or prime importance, please feel free to reach out to me. I'm new but love to learn on the fly. Moksha88 (talk) 03:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
These editsis it just me or is this guy shilling a bunch of entries for a particular paper/author? MartinezMD (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Myopia page: referencesHi James. Thanks for your feedback. I went through the links you mentioned on my talk page, but they don't seem to provide sufficient clarity on which sources are reliable and which are not. In any case, on my talk page, I've replied to your message. I hope I'd be allowed to add facts about resting the eyes. I noticed someone had reverted your changes. Would just like to let you know that it wasn't me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navinwiki (talk • contribs) 14:23, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Proposed resolutionWhy not write to Dr. David Levy at the Georgetown Lombardi Cancer Center and ask him what he and his co-authors of the "reality check" paper think of our e-cig article? dl777 at georgetown dot edu. EllenCT (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Rcat reversion on PreeclampsiaThe text of
The text of
What part of this did I misunderstand? Are all template redirects discouraged by some guideline documented elsewhere? Or perhaps was this not technically "hyphenation," and therefore I should have used If the main problem was the edit summary, apologies for making it sound clickbaity; I will be more careful in the future. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Can you please give me advice on this diffI'm fairly sure you and I agree here --Almaty (talk) 14:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Heat productThere is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Page move problem". Thank you. I also botched the ping. Ivanvector (/Edits) 19:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Does rubbing your eyes cause astigmatism— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C3:4201:D70:815C:EE6F:C103:7A5F (talk)
PCRHi. Just a few seconds ago I realised that you are the only admin on enwiki who is trusted with the PCR user flag. It must have required a lot of trust of the community —usernamekiran (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Cancer WorksheetsHowdy, I know a designer who lost her husband to cancer 3 years ago. She just designed some worksheets for anyone to navigate the process, they are cc-licensed. More info here: https://www.fastcompany.com/90467322/this-designer-lost-her-husband-to-cancer-now-shes-helping-others-cope-through-design I'm messaging because 1.) you probably know other editors in the medical community who specialize in this field, and they may find it useful. 2.) 'Cancer Worksheets' may be worthy of a WP article someday? Victor Grigas (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
And the patient said...Have another round on me! -- Talk 📧 14:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC) |