Congratulations!!!: I read it on the talk page but I had not have time until today to give you a note: The first time I had an article on the main page was an incredible sensation. Nevertheless be prepared to be that day full time online reverting vandalism :-). I will also try to keep an eye on the article. We did a fine job, didn't we? Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 09:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
History
We have an incredible section on history, however it may be getting too long. It also seems that you are digging into sources for this section these days. Have you thought of creating an specific subarticle and summarizing the section?: Right now it seems that with 6 long paragraphs and increasing it might be a good idea. What do you think?
On the other hand I was not sure if I answered your mail on the main page day (I was really messed up in real life those days). I suppose that it had to be an honor to receive a mail praising our work directly from Anita Harding and several HD organizations. What did you feel when you entered that day wikipedia and saw your work in the main page?
Hi Garrondo - I had that feeling earlier that day, I've had a heap of helpful suggestions/corrections from Alice Wexler, I thought the most poignant bit was that there wasn't much evidence prior to vessie/davenport etc. promotion of the idea, about HD being linked to witchcraft etc, so thought I'd better dig a bit deeper - those papers were used as a reference a lot by researchers getting a brief overview of the past so the idea has had more resonance than was due! I am getting hold of a couple of books relevent to the history to sign, seal and deliver the most accurate version so might have to expand further. I do wonder though whether much of this material belongs in Huntington's disease clinical research - could be expanded with its own history section.. what do you reckon?
No worries sorted it out - life is messy ! Goes to show how much appreciation there is out there that we don't normally hear of - most meat space people still haven't grasped the effort us editors put in - or the fact that editors exist and they could contribute themselves... it was very satisfying, but I did seem to spend most of my day trying to explain to meatspace the importance of all this. Ho-hum one day we'll all get medals! Not much vandalism to the article and a host of other editors looking after it so went to a haitian benefit gig in near Falmouth, got separated from my friends on the outskirts of a town I didn't know with no phone or numbers in my head to try and find my way back to a small village which I knew had a 'p' and an 'oo' in its name within 10 miles! Found several clubs and pubs and no locals could help but my description of the brdge in the village centre rung a bell for the taxi-driver guru of the area, two major missions in one day - beauty! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)14:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather prefer a history subarticle than have a history subsection in the clinical research article: Most probably those interested in history of science are not the same than those interested in clinical research.
Yep we are in accordance - a history section of its own. If it looks like a good idea we could have a section related to its history in the clinical research article ( just a short summary with link to main history article ). Lee∴V(talk • contribs)12:17, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You appear to believe that you have proprietorial rights in the page's content. You don't. You say that you moved the radio program link "to specialized subarticle". So where is that? You also appear to have an unfounded faith in the Open Directory Project. The ODP is a joke - it is out of date and uncontrolled. To send people off there when what they want is relevant information is a cruel trick. What exactly is your problem with listing national organisations in the page? I know that Wikipedia is not for lists per se but there are plenty of them where they are relevant and if the lists get too big to handle on a main article page, well hey we can put the list on a separate page eg Old Harrovians. If you want to have a be a proprietor of a page on the web why not apply to be come the editor of the HD page on ODP - it suits people of a bureaucratic disposition. Silent Billy (talk) 00:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, take a chill pill! To answer your questions:
re:proprietory : I don't - I even worked on WP:OWN a while back
re : listing national organizations: Check out the HD talk page ( it might be archived now ), the IHA lists over 40 country specific organisations and there are plenty more .. we can't possibly cover these fairly in the external links ( which should strictly be to pages with more information about the subject than related organisations). Like I said the HDA is linked to in the article itself, the IHA is listed as a reference.
re: ODP. Please check it out before casting judgement, the links to HDA and the Australian HDA are in the first five links on the page, the IHA is listed further down. I was editor of it for a bit, but it didn't suit me ;)
All that said if you have any ideas of how to improve article they are always welcome - the HD talk page would be the place to bring them up... Lee∴V(talk • contribs)14:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alcoholism and comma's
Hey Lee, just to let you know I have finished all of the major points raised in the GA review. The only remaining issue is punctuation issues, mentioned in the GA review in a couple of sections. Are you any good with commas? I am okish, I passed my English exams but not with flying colours lol and with it being a GA nomination would rather someone with better English skills do the finishing touches. If you could do that for me when you have the time it would be much appreciated. No hurry, I know you are busy. :)--Literaturegeek | T@1k?18:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen the medicine project talk page? HD is one of the articles that it is going to be externally evaluated by experts... That is great news but also a high responsibility, don't you think? Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 07:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's great, and a really exciting project altogether. They seem to have selected a selection of articles of all grades, so HD is one of the FA examples and from a cursory read seems the aim is to see how they can improve them. Bring on evaluation - and improvement I say... thanks for pointing this out garrondo! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)22:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well: both are great... I think I will add it to her talk page. :-). I am right now reviewing consistency on HTT and Huntingtin. We should be proud again... Reviewer agrees that article is great.--Garrondo (talk) 12:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes proud indeed! really pleased she came up with some improvements too! Note : I made a comment whilst you were editing - I'm still not completely convinced on the naming conventions, but we should definitely get to the bottom of it, and find the suitable guide/s to put the definition - in order to save others from this fate ;)
Oh, and this is off-topic, but I lol'd at "For your excellent, thorough and well thought out work which helped to promote alcoholism" directly above. I'm nothing if not juvenile, I guess. A F KWhenNeeded10:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear! Thanks for offer of help ... I'm always interested to know how the help system fairs to new editors especially .. is it easy to follow, paced right, too technical, too basic ... that sort of thing ... T
I overheard the conversation - thanks for your confidence, I am considering it - all that talk about RFA looks intimidating, but along the lines of be bold and others beleiving the rfa process should be less harsh I would be happy to see if there is any flak! I fair few things on my real life - and wiki to do lists so have some catching up to do. Seems a possibility but have to think more and await reply as to what there is to do as admin .. I am quite happy editing content - there's more than enough to do , but if we need a few more admins to perform menial maintenance tasks that shouldn't require too much extra brain juice! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)12:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To respond to your question, I think adminship is useful but I have personally strayed wide and far - my temperament does not allow Wikiwarring, and I now use my admin tools sparingly. That said, it would be very helpful with basic gruntwork such as undoing a controversial move. JFW | T@lk20:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To add to what Jfdwolff has already said, I don't think that you have too much to worry about on RfA. Reading over your talk page, and checking your block log, it looks like you have a "clean bill of health"; there is not much for the community to say against you. The only difficultish bit for you I think will probably be how you respond to questions posed by the community. There may be a couple of other people running for admin from Wiki Med, so if you are "on the fence" as to whether or not you run, you could wait until they have run before deciding if you would like to run.--Literaturegeek | T@1k?22:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks guys, I'll have to look into it a bit more methinks after I've caught up with current todos - whilst keeping an eye out for situations that admin tools would be useful... Lee∴V(talk • contribs)23:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Parkinson's
Yeap... I'll try GA some day, but it is still far from it... Maybe in a few months. I am going section by section in it. Right now I am improving the history section. If you want to help you can fix the l-dopa and levodopa issue. The prognosis, epidemiology and society sections are in very bad state, so if you want to search for some high quality sources and even begin rewritting them it would also be of great help... You can choose... :-) I have been alone in the article for 3 months so some company would be fun. Bests. --Garrondo (talk) 18:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Lee, I'm still around in a very much reduced capacity. I don't have much of an excuse to be so inactive given I've nothing to do until September so I might start collaborating a bit more on articles soon. As for the featured topics project, very few people really stepped up to the task (which is fair enough because it is some task making featured topics!). You're welcome to mark it as historical if you wish, especially if our numbers have dropped low enough to make the task unattainable. It might be worth marking it as 'inactive' rather than historical, as I would very much like to return to the idea of featured topics if we get the consensus to do so. Poliomyelitis got pretty far down the line, it'd be a shame if we didn't finish it off at some point!
Oh, now I notice your edit-summary. Thank you very much! A few people have expressed concern that we don't put all of the featured pics in a gallery at the bottom. Then others have said it's fine without. Hmm ... my only concern is that people may not know they have to hit "nom" to see each pic at reasonable size, rather than the huge, slow-to-download images you get from the first-positioned links for each. Tony(talk)12:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear - an ambiguous compliment - I must improve on that ;) I was really referring to the whole page - makes an excellent read compared to old list of... Lee∴V(talk • contribs)17:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your article contributions. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you.
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your article contributions, such as the edit you made to human. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you.
Hi :: the WP About page lead
Hi Lee, I didn't understand exactly what your edit comment on the About page "– if its not it doesn't need to be avoided" refered to. Trev M ~ 15:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, that is a head spinner like that! A crucial word got lost due to touchpad tussles! It was meant to say 'if its not there - it doesn't need to be avoided' , i.e. user will only see recent misinfo that hasn't been removed! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)17:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification... I needed a while to try to work out if there was anything else encoded in that sentence that your shortening took out with it, but I think I agree. Apropo the rest of the lead section, and discussions in the general Lead section talk page, if the lead is so long that the Contents box is off the bottom of the first reasonable resolution uncluttered screen, then the lead section is not doing what it's there for: to give a compact overview of the page before providing the reader with the opportunity to scan for specifics. I'm quite astonished, considering the profile the page has up there in the sidebar, and the 3000 odd watchers it has, that it is neither more refined nor more titchy about changes! Best, Trev M ~ 19:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The ref added to support "are often used to treat children as they have less adverse effects" says "Overall, inhaled corticosteroids provide better asthma control than leukotriene modifiers.86,96,101-103 As a result, an inhaled corticosteroid is the recommended drug of first choice in the treatment of patients with persistent asthma, including children of all ages." Please clarify... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah head cold fog caused a lapse in thoroughness... I thought 'if mentioned in lead this drug needs a context', grabbed the info from Leukotriene antagonist article assuming it was ok - wrong! I generally follow the style of the article as I find it for stuff like references in lead. Thanks for clearing up both articles, your doing great work doc james! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)08:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I notice you reverted an anon on the basis that "glutamate is different to glutamine", which is true of course. However, glutamine is the amino acid that the Huntingdin gene repeats code for and which does the damage. I'm not sure whether glutamate is involved at all. The reference immediately following this part of the article [1] talks about glutamine but not glutamate. It looks to me that the anon is correct, although I am not an expert in the area. If you do change it back, you might like to look at the mention of glutamate in the following paragraph as well.-gadfium18:52, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi... How are things going? You made a few comments on the Parkinson's disease FAC. I tried to address your comments with best or worst luck. It would be great if you could give your opinion on them, make further comments and/or say if you believe that the article fullfills the FA criteria.
That's all right - my comments are really suggestions for a second opinion and not solid comments, have been inundated recently to help as much as I wished...! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)14:09, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand a few weeks ago I took a look at the Huntington's disease article and the pathophisiology section has been growing over time since it became a FA. Most probably it would be a good idea to do some trimming over inconsistencies and mid-quality references; and also create a sub-article and summarize the section in the main article. Had you notice it? What do you think?
--Garrondo (talk) 07:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes have let a few edits slip to see how they panned out, and once its a little quieter plan a revisit and spring clean of the HD article, there's been a fair few developments since the lancet article was published which I need to look at again! Lee∴V(talk • contribs)14:09, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks... Has been a really harsh FAC, but probably worth it... specially since it is a vital article that receives many visits. I hope it appears in the main page April 11 (World Parkinson's day). Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 13:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you went through the mill - sorry I wasn't around a bit more things got in the way - been stuck on a welsh mountain the last week for example! As for the front page - I can't see why not - there is a place to suggest it - I'll find it or second it Lee∴V(talk • contribs)13:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Prevalence of HD
Greetings and thank you for your work on the great HD page. I think the HD prevalence content just posted by our lab would satisfy some of your need for "Epidemiology global statistics and map of prevalence" noted in the Huntington disease Discussion page To-do list. As much work was done to assemble this information and references for a recent paper we want to make this available through Wikipedia on the Huntington's disease page so that the community can use this and ideally, keep it up to date. If you agree, how do you recommend we proceed? Is there a way to translate this large table to a form that is editable and compatible with the existing HD page? Deferring to your experience here and keen to get this information out there. We do have permission to use the map figure according to EJHG's rules: "According to the clause 2d of the License to Publish, it states authors retain the right to reproduce figures in other works created by them. All that is required is an acknowledgment of the journal and Nature Publishing Group." Best, SButland (talk) 18:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When you recently edited Lexx, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channel 5 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
The project's pages have had a major redesign, introducing tabs in order to make them more usable. If you haven't stopped by recently then check them out!
A table of statistics is now available for all pages in Category:WikiProject Help Project, this includes page views, word counts and a variety of readability scores. This should be helpful in prioritising improvement work and finding redundant pages.
{{Breadcrumb2}} is a new template for making attractive navigational breadcrumbs. This may be useful for linking help pages.
This newsletter was started :-)
From the editor
Hi, and welcome to the first issue of the Help Project newsletter! This is a new monthly initiative to keep project members and the wider community informed about our work to improve Wikipedia's help pages. Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter.
I've initially sent this to all existing members of the project, if you don't wish to receive the newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name. Conversely if you've just stumbled on this newsletter (perhaps through talk page stalking) and want to receive it in future then please feel free to sign up!
Progress on the help redesign fellowship continues apace. In-person usability testing is due to start next week, watch this space for results!
A large survey about help pages was conducted. Responses are still coming in, but preliminary results are available.
A new gadget has been proposed to make it easier for new- and non-editors to leave feedback about help pages. Please test it and leave your thoughts.
In somewhat-related-project-news: the Teahouse has wrapped up its pilot phase with an extensive report. Planning and discussion is underway for phase 2.
Hello from the Help Project, and welcome to the second issue of our newsletter!
The biggest project I've been working on this month has been a large survey of users to find out what they think of our current help pages. Preliminary results from this are now available, although there are more responses trickling in from the lower edit count groups since a batch of email invitations were recently sent out. Finalised results and further analysis should be posted next week.
Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter. If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.
New designs for tutorial pages have been proposed, comment from project members is welcome.
From the editor
Welcome to the (slightly delayed) third issue of the Help Project newsletter.
The past month has once again been a busy one for my fellowship. The full results and conclusions from the extensive user survey on help pages are now available, and make interesting reading. These do confirm a number of our suspicions about Wikipedia help, and suggest that the current plan for the remainder of the fellowship is a sound approach.
Also last month I was fortunate enough to attend Wikimania 2012 in Washington DC, where I gave a presentation about help pages and the aforementioned survey results. You can find the slides from this on Commons. Wikimania was also a great opportunity for many discussions with staff and community members, and these brought up some interesting ideas which I hope to follow up on.
One of the things much discussed was the planned tutorial pages. I've been working on a new design for them which can be seen at User:The wub/sandbox/1, please let me know what you think (especially if you spot any bugs!).
Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter. If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.
Hi, and welcome to the fourth issue of the Help Project newsletter.
It's been another busy month in the world of Wikipedia help. The results from the in-person usability tests conducted as part of the help pages fellowship have been released. There are no great surprises here, the tests confirmed that people have trouble with the existing help system, and people looking for help on the same topic often end up at wildly different pages. Editors who experienced a tutorial and/or edited a sandbox as part of their learning were noticeably more confident when editing a real article.
Drawing on that, three new "Introduction to" tutorials for new users have been created: referencing, uploading images and navigating Wikipedia. These join the popular existing introductions to policies and guidelines and talk pages. Feel free to edit them, but please do remember that the idea is to keep them simple and as free from extraneous details as possible. All three have been added to Help:Getting started, which is intended to be the new focal point for new editors, and will also be seeing a redesign soon.
In other news, the Article Feedback Tool (AFT) can now be used to collect feedback on help pages. By default it has been deployed to all pages in the Help: namespace. It can be disabled on any page by adding Category:Article Feedback Blacklist, or enabled for pages in other namespaces by adding Category:Article Feedback 5 Additional Articles. Once a page has AFT applied, you can add feedback using the form which appears at the bottom of it. Feedback can be reviewed by clicking "View feedback" in the sidebar, or the "Feedback from my watched pages" link at the top of your watchlist.
I'm now entering the final month of my fellowship, and will be focusing my efforts on making much needed improvements to Help:Contents, the main entrance point to our help system. It's been a pleasure working as a fellow, and I just want to thank all the people who have helped me or offered advice over the past months. That definitely won't be the end of my involvement in the Help Project though, I'll be sticking around as a volunteer and continuing to write this newsletter.
Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter. If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.
In the last newsletter (which was quite a while ago sorry!) I talked about my fellowship and the plans for improving the main portal page, Help:Contents. Well I'm sad to say that my fellowship is now over, but very happy to say that the proposed improvements to that page have been completed and implemented. Do check it out if you haven't already.
Another important and frequently used help page, Wikipedia:Contact us, has also seen a significant revamp. You may recognise the design inspiration from the new tutorial pages.
In project news, we now have a subscription to the "article alerts" service. Any deletion nominations, move discussions, or requests for comments on pages within the Help Project's scope will now show up at Wikipedia:Help Project/Article alerts. So that's definitely a page which project members might want to watch.
Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter. If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.
Hello. You are invited to join Darius Dhlomo Drive, a project which aims to cleanup and resolve one of the oldest copyright investigations on the sire. We hope that you will join and help to clean what's left of the copyright violations. You are getting this invitation because you have helped out previously, and I am inviting you back to hopefully wrap this up. Wizardman01:40, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To respond to your point, yes. The tables will be fine, as well as a one-sentence lead addition since it's just a general comment. Anything that seems to be original prose that is not often on his articles is very likely to be a copyright violation, and that's what will have to be cut out. Wizardman15:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Open Help Conference will be taking place June 15-19 in Cincinnati Ohio, USA. The conference includes two days of presentations and open discussions, followed by team "sprints" - collaborative efforts to write and improve documentation.
It has been suggested to send a team from Wikipedia/Wikimedia: to share our own knowledge about help, learn from others in the open source community working on similar problems, and to carry out a sprint to improve some aspect of Wikipedia's help.
If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.
The Help Project Newsletter
Issue VII - August 2013
Hello from Hong Kong, and the Wikimania DevCamp! Just a quick bulletin to update everyone on recent goings-on:
There was a Wikimedia blog post about our experience at the Open Help Conference.
Based on discussions at the Open Help Conference, Seeeko, Ocaasi and the wub have drafted a series of guidelines for writing and improving help pages.
There is now also a system in place for assessing help pages by quality and importance. See Wikipedia:Help Project/Assessment for more details and the two scales we are using.
If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Genetics for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 18:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 Medicine
Spotlight - 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:
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
CFCF - "IEG beneficiary" and editor of this newsletter.
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 [4]
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.
Hello, Leevanjackson. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
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!
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Leevanjackson. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Needs an
Medical condition
Leevanjackson
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Hi Leevanjackson! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Hello, Leevanjackson. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Hello Leevanjackson! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot IItalk17:06, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated Huntington's disease for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. buidhe22:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Help:Wikipedia, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Help:Wikipedia and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Help:Wikipedia during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. {{u|Sdkb}}talk23:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
