User talk:Pacula

Med-stubs and category links

Glad to see there's someone keen to re-sort that particular 1500 article monster. Incidentally, you may find it useful to note that you can link to categories like this: Category:Medicine stubs, or indeed using the {{cl}} template, like this: Category:Medicine stubs. Alai 03:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

doctor shopping reword

I appreciate the attempt to fix the article, but I'll be honest it hasn't really done much to improve it. The phrases are still expressing unsourced opinion. Whether that opinion is "many" or "most" or "some" its still opinion or written so vaguely its meaningless. "Some" could be 1, but that 1 may not really be encyclopedic enough to mention.--Crossmr 00:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tension myositis syndrome

[Removed blatant spam left by Ralphyde 19:17, 9 September 2007 (UTC) ][reply]

The message you left on my talk page makes no sense. We are not talking about any uncollaborated self published works here. We are talking about a serious topic that you have blatantly vandalized for your own POV reasons. Also, you didn't bother to sign your post on my talk page. Don't you know how? Ralphyde 19:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep your spam OUT of my userspace, 'Doc'. - Pacula 19:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Backing off from edit war with User:Ralphyde, pending external review

Just wanted to make a note that I do realize that I am coming perilously close to getting into a full-blow edit war with User:Ralphyde, and have decided to back off pending an external review of the matter. This incident is over my attempted removal of the large number of subtle and non-subtle links and references to the uncollaborated claims of John E. Sarno that have been inserted into articles in an apparent attempt to promote his books. I also would like to point out that this user is becoming dangerously close to abusive, to others as well as myself, with frequent claims of 'POV' or 'vandalism' when reverting edits that were made to clean up biased point-of-views. Removing a NPOV template from an article, claiming NPOV reasons, must require an amazing amount of chutzpah. - Pacula 20:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about a RFC on users? There is a process if you think it's worthwhile. In the mean time, keeping cool will help you in the long run. Getting into a revert war over a talk page looks lame for one thing, and reflects badly on both (as opposed to just looking badly on the addee. Just my opinion, but you can take it or leave it. WLU 21:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment - personally I'd wait until after the page was deleted to remove wikilinks to the TMS page. It'll probably happen anyway given the current state of the debate, and while it exists it's valid to have the links on a DAB page like TMS. Though the links on other medical pages are probably valid. Another one of my opinions. WLU 21:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice - it never really crossed my mind that my trying to keep an offensive-to-me comment off my userspace could be seen as a revert war in of itself. If the original comment reappears, I'll let it stay - for now. - Pacula 22:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude (dudette?), I strongly urge you to cease edit warring with Ralphyde on John E. Sarno. Wait for the AFD to resolve itself, then start discussing it on the talk page. Use WP:3O, WP:RFC and if needed, WP:MED or other types of conflict resolution. I'm currently looking over the article and doing some re-writes, but you edit warring isn't helping you or either page. However, your choices are your own so feel free to ignore it. If you do choose to continue, I would recommend editing one section at a time and referring/justifying your edits on the talk page. Saves on the mass-revertin. WLU 21:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations of Vandalism

I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop referring to the edits that I have been making on 'your' articles as 'vandalism'. Disagreeing with you does not make me a vandal, nor does it make attempts at cleaning up the bias in said articles 'non-NPOV', as you also seem to have a habit of claiming. May I politely suggest that you attempt to work with those editors who are attempting to find some kind of balance, rather than simply repeatedly undoing every attempt at cleanup, and stop with the accusations and insinuations. Making personal attacks is not going to get you anywhere - but trying to compromise will. - Pacula 11:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would you call it when a person with no knowledge about a subject, marks that article for rapid deletion when the article has been around since January, 2004, with numerous citations and constantly improved, then on the same day, he goes through the numerous references and links to that subject and proceeds to delete them all with no discussion? I would call that vandalism. Then, when attempts are made to restore the broken links between related subjects that have virtually destroyed the topic, he calls it "Spamming". I will try to refrain from calling you actions vandalism, but only as long as you stop calling my attempts to repair your damage, spamming, which it is certainly not, but is simply connecting related topics. Ralphyde 17:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Threats to Block Me

I have never used Wikipedia for advertising. I have a strong interest in Tension Myositis Syndrome, have read nine books by various authors about it, and I have simply attempted to repair damage you have done to that article by first marking it for deletion, even though it has been an article since January, 2004, with many cited updates by many people also interested in this well established topic, then on the very same day, you went through all the references and links to the article and deleted them, and created a huge mess. This is vandalism on a well cited subject about which you obviously know nothing. To call my attempts to repair the damage you have done "spamming" is not only absurd, but outrageous and arrogant. Tension myositis syndrome is a well established psychosomatic cause of chronic back and other pain, and has been well proven in clinical practice for more than thirty years by licensed physicians. For you to attempt to censor it is outrageous. People who come to Wikipedia because of their chronic back or other pain need to be able to find out about this very successful diagnosis and treatment. In addition, this topic has nothing to do with any "uncollaborated self-published work." Ralphyde 19:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputes

Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators.

An exception is made when dealing with unsourced or poorly sourced contentious biographical material about living persons. Administrators may enforce the removal of such material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. (See the BLP policy.)

Ralphyde 20:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reversions on Fibromyalgia

Hi Pacula,

I recently reverted an edit of yours on Fibromyalgia, not necessarily b/c I disagree with the edit (I haven't had time to check the citation), but b/c I was trying to prevent an edit war. If you can please leave a rationale for the deletion within the talk section, maybe we can resolve this?

Regards, Djma12 ^(talk) 02:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The apology

No need for an apology mate, it never occurred to me that one was even warranted. I'd rather editors like yourself stick your nose over the parapet and draw attention to articles like these. You deserve thanks rather than having to make apologies :) --WebHamster 00:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation, I'm not always quick at getting tongue in cheek stuff, especially in text form. It's an AS thing. He's gonna have a thromb when he sees what I've done to the external link to the treatment page. But yes, I had noticed the big sell. It's starting to become patently clear that this amount of effort to get something not deleted has to have something other than interest associated with it. It's looking more and more like the missing part of the equation is $$$.--WebHamster 01:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is said that there is only one thing worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about :). A copule of thoughts came to mind about that forum post. 1) If they are so disgusted with WP and think so little of it then why are they fighting so hard to get an article on it? 2) For someone to attempt rubbish someone's words from a venue they have so little respect for demonstrates to me that those words must be hitting somewhere where it hurts, most likely in the pocket, why else would they go to the trouble of rubbishing them and attempting to denigrate the person saying them? Personally I think they are concerned that an injection of logic may shatter the fragile belief system of the people it is alleged to have worked on, after all if they weren't weak minded and easily manipulated then they wouldn't believe they were cured. As you said though, so very sad :) It's perked me up no end heheheh --WebHamster 17:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the barnstar!

Hi - thanks for the Rescue from Deletion Barnstar! I appreciate the award, and even more,... I appreciate that you approached the debate as a collaboration and not a fight. Too often, people just dig in to keep their position no matter what, even if there are good reasons to change. I saw your Wikiproject spam userbox, so I'm sure you've seen plenty of that kind of arguing. It was good to have a debate where people worked together in the end (after we got past that nonsense with the sockpuppets or whatever they were). Well, thanks again for the barnstar and your comments, happy editing! --Parsifal _Hello 06:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Mote In God's Eye - original hardcover edition.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The Mote In God's Eye - original hardcover edition.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014

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.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.[reply]

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Medical Translation Newsletter

Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

Medical Translation Newsletter
Issue 1, June/July 2014
by CFCF, Doc James

sign up for monthly delivery

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:

WHO's list of Essential Medicines [1]
Neglected tropical diseases [2]
Key diseases for medical subspecialties like: oncology, emergency medicine (list), anatomy, internal medicine, surgery, etc.

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

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 [3]

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.
Proofreading drives

Further reading

Translators Without Borders
Healthcare information for all by 2015, a global campaign

Medical Translation

partners

resources

outreach

get involved

Sign up

Thanks for reading! To receive a monthly talk page update about new issues of the Medical Translation Newsletter, please add your name to the subscriber's list. To suggest items for the next issue, please contact the editor, CFCF (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Medicine/Translation Taskforce/Newsletter/Suggestions.
Want to help out manage the newsletter? Get in touch with me CFCF (talk · contribs)
For the newsletter from Wikiproject Medicine, see The Pulse
If you are receiving this newsletter without having signed up, it is because you have signed up as a member of the Translation Taskforce, or Wiki Project Med on meta. 22:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Pacula. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Legal history of cannabis in Canada to Cannabis in Canada?

Your comments solicited here: Talk:Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_Canada#Rename_Cannabis_in_Canada_or_create_new_article.3F. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 08:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

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, Pacula. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]