Misplaced Pages

User talk:Doc James: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
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

Download the offline app to access Misplaced Pages's Medical information when there is no InternetWe 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 
This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Doc_James.
Please click here to leave me a new message. Also neither I nor Misplaced Pages give medical advice online.


Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174



This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Centralized discussion
Village pumps
policy
tech
proposals
idea lab
WMF
misc
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Electronic cigarette Article Changes, Reversions

As 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.

Medical content requires medical citations. Does not matter if the article is "medical" or not.
Not every global jurisdiction, nor every person considers them to be Medical Devices. No doubt this is why the article appears so contentious, and suffers from the large numbers of edits. Please be so kind as to direct me to how Misplaced Pages suggests handling this, if you would. Is a vape device considered a Medical Device without nicotine or flavoring? Who makes "the call"?Jd4x4 (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
You need to have evidence before you claim someone is a sock of another editor. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Correct. That is why I stated it the way I did. "For all I know..". That was intended to alert you to how it may appear, outwardly. Apologies if I've offended you, I'm generally unaware of Wiki-jargon and it's connotations.Jd4x4 (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Introduction

Thank 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)

User:Moksha88 sounds good :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:19, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

These edits

is 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)

Looks like they are promoting papers by Kamoru User:MartinezMD Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Myopia page: references

Hi 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 (talkcontribs) 14:23, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

You need to use high quality secondary sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed resolution

Why 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)

That is a primary source User:EllenCT Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
It's a review: "To estimate youth and young adult vaping prevalence, we conducted a search of the literature through December 2017 using PubMed to find nationally representative surveys on youth and young adult vaping, particularly studies of trends. The search strategy consisted of the following keywords: (‘e-cigarette’ OR ‘electronic cigarette’ OR ‘vaporized nicotine’ OR ‘vaping’) AND (‘youth’ OR ‘young adult’ OR ‘adolescent’ OR ‘student’) AND (‘prevalence’ OR ‘use’). We also considered US surveys that collected information on tobacco use for either youth or young adults. We restrict the analyses to results from nationally representative surveys for youth and young adults aged 15 through 25, where smoking initiation and the progression to more established smoking generally occur." EllenCT (talk) 04:38, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Not listed as a review by pubmed. Or for that matter by the journal that published it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
When you decide whether something is a systematic review, do you look at whether they performed a review systematically, or whether the PubMed data entry clerk checked the box? EllenCT (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
So they looked for "publicly available" data and than analysed it. They did not do a review of exiting research on the topic.
This does not justify removing National Academies of Sciences or the Surgeon General's concerns. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:00, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Rcat reversion on Preeclampsia

The text of {{R from modification}} states:

Please note that there are are many more specific templates. Please use {{R from alternative spelling}} for...

The text of {{R from alternative spelling}} states (emphasis mine):

At present, {{R from alternative hyphenation}}, {{R from alternative punctuation}}, and {{R from alternative spacing}} all redirect to this template and feed into the same maintenance category. This is likely to change in the future, so please use the more specific template names.

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 {{R from alternative punctuation}}?

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)

User:SoledadKabocha. Text on Misplaced Pages loads at different times which means buttons move around. So when you go to click one button you hit another by mistake.
You will see that I reverted my mistake 12 minutes before you left this comment. Let me know if I missed anything. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Acknowledged, and I will be more diligent in checking such things in the future. Most of those 12 minutes were spent composing this post + taking care of other things IRL; I realize that this caused some unnecessary hassle. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 06:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
User:SoledadKabocha no worries imagined as much :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Can you please give me advice on this diff

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2019–20_coronavirus_outbreak&type=revision&diff=942410259&oldid=942410169&diffmode=source

I'm fairly sure you and I agree here --Almaty (talk) 14:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

The references are useful and should stay IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Heat product

Information icon There 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)

Thanks and commented on the move request. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Does rubbing your eyes cause astigmatism

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C3:4201:D70:815C:EE6F:C103:7A5F (talk)

Doubt it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

PCR

Hi. 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)

oh wait. You did it yourself -_-
—usernamekiran (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
User:usernamekiran yah the tool was malfunctioning a month ago. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Cancer Worksheets

Howdy, 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

Cancer Worksheets

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)

User:Victorgrigas thanks. These look very nice. If there are enough sources would be worthy of an article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Just the fastcompany article and the website right now afaik. Victor Grigas (talk) 00:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Maybe something more general like Healthcare worksheets? Not sure if there is evidence for that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

And the patient said...

Have another round on me! ^_^ -- Talk 📧 14:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Doc James: Difference between revisions Add topic