And I think it's fine for people in general to dive in, use a variety of good sources, and do our best. We all have bodies and we're all somewhat familiar with being sick and/or enjoying good health. Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
For example . . .
Okay, Dr. Thomas Frieden was New York City Health Commissioner and then appointed by President Obama to head CDC in 2009.
And plus, this is useful information. This is information which has some texture to it. In poker terms, this is a playable hand!
And these topics are too important to do anything less than our best work. Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
My first idea was, since I'm not a doctor, and you probably aren't either, is to just present the excerpt 'transparently,' that is, just as it is. But this ran into so much opposition, okay, fine, in the interest of moving forward, we will summarize. Cool Nerd ( talk) 00:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, chapter 8: “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," pages 22-23 (26-27 in PDF file).
" . . . In children with severe malnutrition it is often impossible to distinguish reliably between some dehydration and severe dehydration.
"Of equal importance, it is also difficult to distinguish severe dehydration from septic shock, as both conditions reflect hypovolaemia and reduced blood flow to vital organs. An important distinguishing feature is that severe dehydration requires a history of watery diarrhoea. A severely malnourished child with signs suggesting severe dehydration but without a history of watery diarrhoea should be treated for septic shock."
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, chapter 8: “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," page 23 (27 in PDF file).
" . . . Rehydration should usually be by mouth; an NG tube may be used for children who drink poorly. IV infusion easily causes over-hydration and heart failure; it should be used only for the treatment of shock.
"Oral rehydration should be done slowly, giving 70-100 ml/kg over 12 hours. Start by giving about 10 ml/kg/hour during the first two hours. Continue at this rate or a lower rate based on the child's thirst and ongoing stool losses. Increasing oedema is evidence of over-hydration. . . "
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, chapter 8: “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," page 23 (27 in PDF file).
"When using the new ORS solution containing 75 mEq/l of sodium:
• dissolve one ORS packet into two litres of clean water (to make two litres instead of one litre);
• add 45 ml of potassium chloride solution (from stock solution containing 100g KCl/l); and
• add and dissolve 50g sucrose.
"These modified solutions provide less sodium (37.5 mmol/l), more potassium (40 mmol/l) and added sugar (25g/l), each of which is appropriate for severely malnourished children with diarrhoea."
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005, page 8-9 (12-13 in PDF).
"4.2 Treatment Plan A: home therapy to prevent dehydration and malnutrition
"" . . . Mothers should be taught how to prevent dehydration at home by giving the child more fluid than usual, how to prevent malnutrition by continuing to feed the child, and why these actions are important. . . "
"4.2.1 Rule 1: Give the child more fluids than usual, to prevent dehydration
"" . . . Wherever possible, these should include at least one fluid that normally contains salt (see below). Plain clean water should also be given. . .
"Fluids that normally contain salt, such as: • ORS solution • salted drinks (e.g. salted rice water or a salted yoghurt drink) • vegetable or chicken soup with salt. . .
"Fluids that do not contain salt, such as: • plain water • water in which a cereal has been cooked (e.g. unsalted rice water) • unsalted soup • yoghurt drinks without salt • green coconut water • weak tea (unsweetened) • unsweetened fresh fruit juice. . . "
Possible photos:
http://rehydrate.org/solutions/homemade.htm line drawing showing 6 teaspoons sugar, 1/2 teaspoon salt being added to one liter water. (about 2/3's way down)
http://www.walmart.com/ip/Swanson-Vegetarian-100-Fat-Free-Vegetable-Broth-14-oz/15556206 picture of a can of common soup, not so bad
http://www.euroasiafoods.com/Chaosuan_VegetableBroth_pg.html
http://www.health.com/health/gallery/0,,20569920_6,00.html
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005, page 9 (13 in PDF):
"Unsuitable fluids
"A few fluids are potentially dangerous and should be avoided during diarrhoea. Especially important are drinks sweetened with sugar, which can cause osmotic diarrhoea and hypernatraemia. Some examples are: • commercial carbonated beverages • commercial fruit juices • sweetened tea."
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005, page 9 (13 in PDF):
"Unsuitable fluids . . . "Other fluids to avoid are those with stimulant, diuretic or purgative effects, for example: • coffee • some medicinal teas or infusions."
Good work. I think there needs to be a mention that most of the current cases are in Kansai, but i don`t have a reference yet...best wishes andycjp ( talk) 16:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
That wasn't me. I've undid the IP edit that removed the table. Tim Vickers ( talk) 20:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to 2009 swine flu outbreak. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you.
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to 2009 swine flu outbreak. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 00:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thankssss.... Yess!!!... with SOURCES, I want to tell the world what's happening with the flu here in Argentina, what She and He don't want to tell. :D BUT ALWAYS WITH SOURCES -- 190.50.114.22 ( talk) 01:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, xD... you're from Argentina too?... ey ... Argentina on this map [1] should be with another color ... +50 -- 190.50.114.22 ( talk) 01:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below. At 2009 swine flu outbreak, per a complaint at WP:AN3. EdJohnston ( talk) 03:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Cool Nerd ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I have stayed polite throughout. The article has to stay easily updatable on a chronological basis, or else it's not useful. And most of all, Swine Flu 2009 is a potential public health crisis, so far merely potentially.
Decline reason:
Doesn't cover what's typically expected in a well thought out request (there's a guide linked to in the block template). But regardless this is a short block, so take the time to gather your thoughts and ensure you have a grasp on the policy. Nja 247 07:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Cool Nerd has been trying to change the article to adopt a more news-like format. In the thread where this was clearly discussed on the Talk page, a majority were against this change. Hmwith, Wikiwatcher1, Tim Vickers, Leevanjackson and LeadSongDog were against the change, and only you spoke in favor of it. I have no objection to another admin lifting the block early early if you agree to stop trying to change the page format without getting consensus on the Talk page first. I won't be available for a few hours so can't address the matter till then. EdJohnston ( talk) 05:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Discussion pages are typically cul-de-sacs. It's where people discuss things, sometimes very thoughtfully, and then no one ever responds to them. Usually.
So, I skimmed the comments, made a brief comment and that was that. People seemed to be making the argument
including news item --> problem
including news item --> imperfection
Well, what about the problem of not including it? Namely, that we are going to fail to communicate with our readers--when we easily could. My method is transparent. The chart and the map are not. Those take a heroic effort to keep up. And even then, it is not obvious what is up-to-date and what isn't. My method is also easy. It invites new readers to participate.
As far as being in a minority, it doesn't particularly bother me. Okay, Ed, you have to work quickly and make a decision on the base numbers. That's fine as far as it goes. And yeah, it's only 24 hours. But I am hoping that at a certain point you, if you have an real interest in Swine Flu 2009, or other people will look at the actual content of the arguments.
So, far, the conversation has been a largely disconnected.
I say, 'Hey, our current rules don't really helpfully apply to this current situation . . .'
Someone else says, 'The current rules are . . . '
Maybe that's the beginning of a conversation. Or maybe not even that.
I would rather have goals than rules. 'We attempt to give the complete story with references.' What is wrong with that?
And we are going to not give people complete and up-to-date information because it's somehow messy or disorderly?
The real rules of wikipedia seem to be "formality," "stilted," and "we're practicing for school (and/or the corporate world)"
Rules that are useful are distillations from experience. And even then, we have to adopt to changes in circumstances, changes in technology, etc.
So, what I'm going to do is to attempt to find some teammates. I'm guess I'm going to attempt to find some fellow radicals. Although I think of myself squarely as a middle-of-the-roader, maybe things are so formal . . . that perhaps I am a radical.
And where people really talk are in the short comments in the history section. This is a pretty good current practice. I think we should roll with this. Perhaps try to augment it with other avenue, but keep it as one good option.
Swine Flu is a rapidly evolving story that could break bad at any time. Hopefully, it won't. But it could. Cool Nerd ( talk) 21:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
About the Space Shuttle Challenger and the Space Shuttle Columbia, as talked about in the System Accident article and discussion page, why did the engineers not push their point harder? All of the above! Cool Nerd ( talk) 21:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that is right, tamiflu is a transition state analogue of sialic acid so inhibits cleavage of these sugars and prevents viral release from infected cells. However, that is nothing to do with the human immune response to influenza since, although neutralising antibodies are produced to both neuraminidase (N) and haemaglutanin (H), amino acid substitutions that confer resistance to the drug would be in the active site of neuraminidase, not on the surface of the protein, and would be unlikely to change the antigenicity of the protein. Tim Vickers ( talk) 22:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The section title in Talk:2009 swine flu outbreak#Victoria, Australia has stopped widespread testing. And this part deleted, but our article depends so heavily on numbers is very long. It can cause the title to appear distorted on low resolutions and makes the TOC really wide. It makes it easier and neater to just use short titles, then just elaborate in the text of the section. hmwith τ 20:57, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I was about to go to bed about 1 1/2 hours ago. Mind you, it is 3:30 here and I have to work tomorrow morning. But let's make a good article soon! Will be back on Monday or Tuesday. FHessel ( talk) 01:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Sure, let's give it a go and see what happens. Tim Vickers ( talk) 02:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Here are some good links:
|
The only thing I really had issue with was the statement that not taking it "right" somehow causes resistance. Even though this is a persistent belief there does not seem to be evidence. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 00:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
(undent) the info on when to go to the hospital is on the treatment sub page. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 03:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I do very much endorse including good info from the WHO in the article, but could you please summarize rather than adding long direct quotes? Also, the WHO doesn't necessarily need dedicated sections just for its comments on stuff. -- Cybercobra (talk) 02:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
The article Swine Flu, Current Situation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
Proposed Deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Abce2|
If you would
like to make a call..
20:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Swine Flu, Current Situation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
MuffledThud (
talk)
20:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Swine Flu H1N1, WHO Recommendations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
fetch
comms
☛
20:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Fetchcomms,
Unlike SARS or West Nile which struck me as mainly hype, H1N1 strikes me as potentially very serious indeed , and I have worked on this issue for the last six months. I have been frequently stymied by the overly formal style of wiki . . . I don't think we're giving parents our best work at all, and parents would be our most demanding readers. "Students writing papers" are likely to be among our least demanding readers, anything written in formal style's going to be acceptable whether it has glaring omissions or not.
I would ask you to consider this commitment: if I can demonstrate to a reasonable degree, civil standard, more likely than not, 51%, that quoting excerpts from WHO, in fact quoting rather long excerpts from WHO is allowable under fair use, can I count on you to welcome experiments in less formal style and less standing between the reader and the information?
I also want to look at news articles, for example:
That's written in lively style. The only thing I would be doing is sanding it down. I would not be doing parents, or anyone else, a favor.
The hard part of it is that this is only 30% of it. The other 70% of severe cases is direct viral pneumonia. And that pattern is not as obvious, but we still need to talk about it, with the best information we can find. The topic is hard enough as it is.
Would you in fact be willing to take a good long look at fair use with me?
And copyright for the above NYTimes article? Well, we're doing it for education purposes. It's 41 words out of 609. And "nature of copyrighted work," another part of the four-part balancing test, it's from the New York Times, which does sell subscriptions, but it's way back from the beginning of September. We have not scooped them. If anything, if anything it seems to me that we have promoted their writer Denise Grady.
But there would be longer excerpts, shorter time horizons. And health articles probably do have a longer shelf life than pop culture articles.
Cool Nerd ( talk) 00:25, 24 November 2009 (UTC) (reposted on my talk page)
From our article Fair Use:
" . . . Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. [1] . . . "
I have deleted the article you created, Swine Flu, Current Situation, because the article was created by copypasting text from copyrighted articles. Wikipedia allows the use of brief quotations of copyrighted text when properly attributed. However, entire articles or substantial portions of them created by copypasting text, even when attributed and placed in quotations, is not permitted -- and will not meet any "fair use" rationale. If you wish to include new information in Wikipedia, I would suggest that you add it to one of the Swine flu articles, using your own words, with references to the appropriate sources. Thanks. — CactusWriter | needles 20:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I know your heart is in the right place, but copyright violations don't help anyone. We want people to respect Wikipedia's license, therefore we in turn should obey other people's copyright. Contrary to what you say, it doesn't necessarily take expertise to summarize what experts say; just look at the new Diagnostic section I added to 2009 flu pandemic, it just takes careful reading and some application of the simple "school skills" you mentioned. -- Cybercobra (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hey NC you seem to agree strongly on this new approach. I think your idea of creating a subpage to displace this approach and garner feedback from the group is a good one. I assume you will use a sub page of your user page?
WRT copyright: Well the US gov releases much of what they create into the public domain most of the rest of the world ( governments, WHO, etc ) do not. Therefore using large amounts of these materials may tread on some toes. It is also easy enough to reword it.
Having a list of guidelines with the date they came out could be a subpage of public health. This is not really an encylopedic format though. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Took the liberty of creating a subpage were this can be worked on and discussed. User:Cool_Nerd/Sandbox Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for notifying me. Even under fair use, Wikipedia has a policy against direct copy-pasting information. The article needs sources, but should not be completely copy-pasted, regardless of copyrights or anything. An article that consists solely of a quote isn't really permissible either way. I personally don't find Wikipedia's tone formal, though it is an encyclopedia and should be written as such. See, what you need to do is find the articles, as you have been doing, and put them in your own words. That's the point of Wikipedia, to present such information from reliable external sources but not in complete, unchanged quotes. Therefore, I applaud your efforts to help, but you should realize that regardless of fair use or anything related, you simply cannot create articles consisting of mainly or only copy/pasted text from other articles. I would be more than happy to help with any articles you wish to create though, granted that they do not violate our guidelines and policies, of course. Thanks again, fetch comms ☛ 00:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Do you understand where I'm going with this? I know that this is an important article--but it's not for Wikipedia as-is. (Also, you don't need to post your messages on both mine and your talk pages, one is fine. But if you reply here, be sure to tell me on my page, thanks)-- fetch comms ☛ 02:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Try focusing more on the text. Make comments on the talkpage such as "I think we should say statement A in wording A rather than statement B in wording B." I'm afraid your comments are often hard for me to follow, since you discuss the subject broadly and at length as if we were sitting about having coffee! :) While this is friendly and I'm sure well-intentioned, it does make things rather unfocused and hinders discussions about specific parts of the text. Anyway, that's my advice - feel free to take it or leave it. Tim Vickers ( talk) 21:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I have written about our editing problem on Tim's page. I look forward to speaking with you on his page, and once again having a good relationship. Gandydancer ( talk) 13:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
‘ . . . In a country where the virus is circulating, we have 3 updated recommendations.
‘1. Firstly, people in at-risk groups need to be treated with antivirals as soon as possible when they have flu symptoms. This includes pregnant women, children under 2 years old, and people with “underlying conditions” such as respiratory problems.
‘2. Secondly, people who are not from the at-risk group but who have persistent or rapidly worsening symptoms should also be treated with antivirals. These symptoms include difficulty breathing and a high fever that lasts beyond 3 days.
‘3. Thirdly, people who have already developed pneumonia should be given both antivirals and antibiotics, as we have seen that, in many severe cases of H1N1-caused illness, bacterial infection develops. These medicines, antivirals and antibiotics, if used in a timely manner, can help save lives.
‘I want to stress that people who are not from the at-risk group and who have only typical cold need not take antivirals. . . ’ (page 1)
' . . . The pandemic virus can cause severe pneumonia even in healthy young people, though rather minor in proportion, and the virus can take life within a week. The window of opportunity is very narrow to reverse the progression of the disease. The medicine needs to be administered before the virus destroys the lungs. . . ' (page 2, second paragraph)
Hospitalized Patients with 2009 H1N1 Influenza in the United States, April–June 2009, New England Journal of Medicine, Jain, Kamimoto, et al., Nov. 12, 2009:
“ . . . the only variable that was significantly associated with a positive outcome was the receipt of antiviral drugs within 2 days after the onset of illness.” (Outcomes, second paragraph)
" . . . In our study, only 73% of patients with radiographic evidence of pneumonia received antiviral drugs, whereas 97% received antibiotics. In the absence of accurate diagnostic methods, patients who are hospitalized with suspected influenza and lung infiltrates on chest radiography should be considered for treatment with both antibiotics and antiviral drugs. . . " (Discussion, 8th paragraph)
“ . . . The benefits of treatment are probably greatest when such therapy is started early, but antiviral drugs should not be withheld if patients present more than 48 hours after the onset of symptoms. . . ” (Discussion, last paragraph)
posted by Cool Nerd ( talk) 17:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC), revised and added to Cool Nerd ( talk) 02:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Report Finds Swine Flu Has Killed 36 Children, New York Times, DENISE GRADY, September 3, 2009:
“ . . . In children without chronic health problems, it is a warning sign if they seem to recover from the flu but then relapse with a high fever, Dr. Frieden said. The relapse may be bacterial pneumonia, which must be treated with antibiotics. . . . ”
When to take a sick child to the ER Children and youths are especially hard-hit by swine flu. It is important to watch for danger signs, as the onset of respiratory failure can be swift, Los Angeles Times, Rong-Gong Lin II, November 21, 2009:
‘ . . . "Is there something really different about your child that's different from the seven or eight viral infections your kid gets every year? Those are the changes to look out for," said Dr. Mark Morocco, associate residency director for emergency medicine at UCLA.
‘Warning signs include significant difficulty breathing; inability to drink fluids or urinate for more than six hours; change in the color of the mouth or lips; or unusual behavioral changes, such as a crying child who cannot be consoled, or a child who doesn't wake up or walk or talk normally. . . . ’
Warning center learns from miscalculation, Honolulu Advertiser, Gordon Y.K. Pang, Advertiser Staff Writer, Feb. 28, 2010:
‘ . . . DART gauges spread across the sea floor to detect the size of tsunami waves are a fairly new technology, Fryer said. The initial wave reading from the DART gauge showed 25 centimeters, huge for the deep water, he said.
‘"At that point, we went to full Pacific-wide warning," he said. "Part of the reason we had to do that was because although it was huge, we didn't quite know what it meant because we haven't much experience with those. As we get more under our belts, we'll get better."
‘He added: "Fifty percent error, that's OK. That's about the level of accuracy in this game. It will get better."
‘Nonetheless, "with every event the system improves," Fryer said. . . ’
'The last wave almost wiped the village off the map', The Irish Times, MARIO NARANJO in Dichato, Tuesday, March 2, 2010:
‘ . . . The first two surges startled the town’s 7,000 residents, who had already been violently awakened by the earthquake that wrought destruction across a swathe of central Chile. But it was the third surge, a huge wall of water, that tore up and smashed houses, swept cars out to sea, and sucked people’s possessions into the sea, destroying more than three-quarters of the town’s buildings.
‘“The last one almost wiped the village off the map,” said David Merino, surrounded by a scene of water-logged destruction in the village, which was among the closest settlements to the 8.8-magnitude quake.
‘It was still unclear how many people died in Dichato, where distraught residents wandered the town trying to salvage possessions and gazing at their ruined homes. . . ’
" . . . It was found that the accident was not the result of a chance malfunction in a statistical sense, but rather resulted from an unusual combination of mistakes, coupled with a somewhat deficient and unforgiving design. [Emphasis added] . . . "
.
.
"c. In addition, it is probable that the tank contained a loosely fitting fill tube assembly. [Emphasis added] This assembly was probably displaced during subsequent handling, which included an incident at the prime contractor's plant in which the tank was jarred. [Emphasis added]
.
.
"f. The special detanking procedures at KSC subjected the tank to an extended period of heater operation and pressure cycling. [Emphasis added] These procedures had not been used before, and the tank had not been qualified by test for the conditions experienced. However, the procedures did not violate the specifications [Emphasis added] which governed the operation of the heaters at KSC.
.
"h. A number of factors contributed to the presence of inadequate thermostatic switches in the heater assembly. The original 1962 specifications from NR to Beech Aircraft [Emphasis added] Corporation for the tank and heater assembly specified the use of 28 V [Emphasis added] dc power, which is used in the spacecraft. In 1965, NR issued a revised specification [Emphasis added] which stated that the heaters should use a 65 V [Emphasis added] dc power supply for tank pressurization; this was the power supply used at KSC to reduce pressurization time. Beech ordered switches for the Block II tanks but did not change the switch specifications to be compatible with 65 V dc.
.
.
.
"l. As shown by subsequent tests, failure of the thermostatic switches probably permitted the temperature of the heater tube assembly to reach about 1000° F in spots during the continuous 8-hour period of heater operation. Such heating has been shown by tests to severely damage the Teflon insulation on the fan motor wires in the vicinity of the heater assembly. From that time on, including pad occupancy, the oxygen tank no. 2 was in a hazardous condition [Emphasis added] when filled with oxygen and electrically powered.
"m. It was not until nearly 56 hours into the mission, however, that the fan motor wiring, possibly moved by the fan stirring, short circuited and ignited its insulation [Emphasis added] by means of an electric arc. The resulting combustion in the oxygen tank probably overheated and failed the wiring conduit where it enters the tank, and possibly a portion of the tank itself.
. . . "
REPORT OF APOLLO 13 REVIEW BOARD ("Cortright Report"), Chair Edgar M. Cortright, CHAPTER 5, FINDINGS, DETERMINATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS, see pages 5-1 through 5-3. See also Apollo 13 Review Board which has the table of contents for the entire report.
Can you please revert your last edit to Apollo 13? I see you've been around about as long as I have and done about as much editing--we're no experts, but have a little experience under our belts. My understanding of the way to write an article--and I can't find a page that says this--is that the lead summarizes and introduces the whole article. It doesn't replace information; that information needs to be repeated in its proper place, although it's hardly considered repeating. The lead is an introduction, while the article should be complete in itself without the lead. Thanks. -- Yopienso ( talk) 04:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
"Oxygen tank #2 fans on. Stabilization control system electrical disturbance indicated a power transient. 055:53:20
.
.
. . . It was at this time that the crew heard a loud bang. 055:54:53.555"
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_13h_Timeline.htm
There was a fair amount going on between these two events.
On 16 August 2010, I made the change in our Apollo 13 article, from "Suddenly, . . " to "Approximately 93 seconds later . . " Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I think a large part of the answer is that we spend so much time and energy on the formality of the writing itself, at the expense of accuracy and breadth of coverage. Cool Nerd ( talk) 16:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi Middayexpress, it's been good working with you on the drought. I think we should be both nominated for bronze stars if there's a reputable way to do so! And if we sometimes come at things from different angles, I think that's a positive.
Okay, the above is big, and I think we've got to include it. In fact, I think we should try and recruit some help if we can. For example, JimSukwutput used to be a regular contributor but perhaps got busy with other things.
I made some recent additions to our discussion page "41 Nov. 2011 Unicef press release . . . " I'm going to think about it a little and then probably add it to our main article. Please help if you have the time. And let's do see if we can recruit some other editors and researchers. Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear Author/Cool Nerd
My name is Nuša Farič and I am a Health Psychology MSc student at the University College London (UCL). I am currently running a quantitative study entitled Who edits health-related Wikipedia pages and why? I am interested in the editorial experience of people who edit health-related Wikipedia pages. I am interested to learn more about the authors of health-related pages on Wikipedia and what motivations they have for doing so. I am currently contacting the authors of randomly selected articles and I noticed that someone at this address edited an article on Influenza. I would like to ask you a few questions about you and your experience of editing the above mentioned article and or other health-related articles. If you would like more information about the project, please visit my user page ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hydra_Rain) and if interested, please reply via my talk page or e-mail me on nusa.faric.11@ucl.ac.uk. Also, others interested in the study may contact me! If I do not hear back from you I will not contact this account again. Thank you very much in advance. Hydra Rain ( talk) 13:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello Cool Nerd.
Thanks for your invitation about H7N9. But I am sad to tell you that I could not help you at the moment because I think I am still not the right person for you to have.
Thanks for your understanding.
Regards, 123sage321 ( talk)
Hi cool nerd, You're cool! I currently have a fever and have had diarrhea all day and your contributions have been helping me learn how to take care of myself. Thank you NIRVANA2764 ( talk) 22:13, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
And hope you get feeling better. :>) Cool Nerd ( talk) 16:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
You must paraphrase the content you use. Have reverted some of your edits as it was word for word the same as this source from WHO [3] Good source but paraphrasing needed. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
http://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/SAM_Guideline.pdf Starting at page 18 (19 in PDF). Cool Nerd ( talk) 19:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Actually, my favorite jobs have been in retail management and sales! So, yeah, I'm a furniture sales guy diving into health topics.
I take a good source, excerpt it, and summarize it. And you, too, can help out with health topics. :~) Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
13:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)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)
16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
00:06, 9 March 2017 (UTC)The gist of the matter seems to be the phrase "infants who do not breastfeed are up to six times more likely to die from." And yes, it is embarrassing. It was not my goal for it to end up this way. I don't think I copied it in its entirely for I usually cut and paste in the white space below my active work area phrases such as:
That is, primarily phrases which have numbers. And then in my active work area, I rewrite in my own words. At least, I usually do. I remembering wanting to include why formula feeding is often less safe. Yes, the WHO article talked about clean water. But I know that there's a whole second issue that lower-income families can't really afford to buy enough product, so they frequently water it down in an effort to stretch the product, just like you or I might do if in the same situation. But this wasn't in this particular WHO page, so I didn't include it. Yes, I might have copied and pasted that one sentence because I was focusing on other things, but I don't think I did. I think it's equally likely that I did rewrite it and then changed it back during my second rewrite for better flow! All I can promise is fewer steps in the future. I might skip the second rewrite for the sake of simplicity. I know enough about complications and system accidents to make this change. Fewer steps, not more steps. And please notice that I did add "and families may or may not have dependable access to clean water" to make a longer, compound sentence. I know that's not enough. But I was in there trying. It was not an intentional mistake.
Doc James, the other sentence you put in boldface, I in fact did rewrite.
My version is: "In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) states that if an HIV-positive mother breastfeeds her infant for two years without medication, 14–20% of infants will become infected." I think that's a good paraphrase. If you think it's not acceptable, I'd very much like to hear your reasoning. Cool Nerd ( talk) 19:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I think Wikipedia can be so much more than it currently is, and I've occasionally presented my case and at times probably argued my case. I realize that I don't have majority support, so I do follow the current rules.
I have more than 10 years of good edits, and I've worked on health topics since 2009. Cool Nerd ( talk) 20:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
As part of our Primary School research project, an external HIV expert gave a good dozen specific suggestion for improving the article in Feb. 2016. /info/en/?search=Talk:HIV
To his or her credit, one person implement two of these recommendations: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=HIV&diff=704587934&oldid=704120893 https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=HIV&diff=next&oldid=704587934
And more than a year later, I made this change: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=HIV&diff=769311394&oldid=768587512
I removed the parts where the expert wrote "are, I think, nonsense" and then added back the references to our "Further reading" in my next edit
Potential conclusions:
1) The Talk page just does not receive that much attention, no matter how good a particular section might be.
2) We're pretty much at the limits of our abilities right now.
3) Wikipedia is often like the Telephone Game. One person whispers to another who whispers to another, etc, etc, maybe five deep, maybe more. For example, how often do you check whether a couple of sentences in an article accurately summarizes a footnote used versus rewriting for the sake of flow, clarity, or formal language?
So, yes, wiki is very much a work in progress, and we still have a fair amount of work to do. Cool Nerd ( talk) 20:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
And I think it's fine for people in general to dive in, use a variety of good sources, and do our best. We all have bodies and we're all somewhat familiar with being sick and/or enjoying good health. Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
For example . . .
Okay, Dr. Thomas Frieden was New York City Health Commissioner and then appointed by President Obama to head CDC in 2009.
And plus, this is useful information. This is information which has some texture to it. In poker terms, this is a playable hand!
And these topics are too important to do anything less than our best work. Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
My first idea was, since I'm not a doctor, and you probably aren't either, is to just present the excerpt 'transparently,' that is, just as it is. But this ran into so much opposition, okay, fine, in the interest of moving forward, we will summarize. Cool Nerd ( talk) 00:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, chapter 8: “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," pages 22-23 (26-27 in PDF file).
" . . . In children with severe malnutrition it is often impossible to distinguish reliably between some dehydration and severe dehydration.
"Of equal importance, it is also difficult to distinguish severe dehydration from septic shock, as both conditions reflect hypovolaemia and reduced blood flow to vital organs. An important distinguishing feature is that severe dehydration requires a history of watery diarrhoea. A severely malnourished child with signs suggesting severe dehydration but without a history of watery diarrhoea should be treated for septic shock."
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, chapter 8: “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," page 23 (27 in PDF file).
" . . . Rehydration should usually be by mouth; an NG tube may be used for children who drink poorly. IV infusion easily causes over-hydration and heart failure; it should be used only for the treatment of shock.
"Oral rehydration should be done slowly, giving 70-100 ml/kg over 12 hours. Start by giving about 10 ml/kg/hour during the first two hours. Continue at this rate or a lower rate based on the child's thirst and ongoing stool losses. Increasing oedema is evidence of over-hydration. . . "
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, chapter 8: “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," page 23 (27 in PDF file).
"When using the new ORS solution containing 75 mEq/l of sodium:
• dissolve one ORS packet into two litres of clean water (to make two litres instead of one litre);
• add 45 ml of potassium chloride solution (from stock solution containing 100g KCl/l); and
• add and dissolve 50g sucrose.
"These modified solutions provide less sodium (37.5 mmol/l), more potassium (40 mmol/l) and added sugar (25g/l), each of which is appropriate for severely malnourished children with diarrhoea."
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005, page 8-9 (12-13 in PDF).
"4.2 Treatment Plan A: home therapy to prevent dehydration and malnutrition
"" . . . Mothers should be taught how to prevent dehydration at home by giving the child more fluid than usual, how to prevent malnutrition by continuing to feed the child, and why these actions are important. . . "
"4.2.1 Rule 1: Give the child more fluids than usual, to prevent dehydration
"" . . . Wherever possible, these should include at least one fluid that normally contains salt (see below). Plain clean water should also be given. . .
"Fluids that normally contain salt, such as: • ORS solution • salted drinks (e.g. salted rice water or a salted yoghurt drink) • vegetable or chicken soup with salt. . .
"Fluids that do not contain salt, such as: • plain water • water in which a cereal has been cooked (e.g. unsalted rice water) • unsalted soup • yoghurt drinks without salt • green coconut water • weak tea (unsweetened) • unsweetened fresh fruit juice. . . "
Possible photos:
http://rehydrate.org/solutions/homemade.htm line drawing showing 6 teaspoons sugar, 1/2 teaspoon salt being added to one liter water. (about 2/3's way down)
http://www.walmart.com/ip/Swanson-Vegetarian-100-Fat-Free-Vegetable-Broth-14-oz/15556206 picture of a can of common soup, not so bad
http://www.euroasiafoods.com/Chaosuan_VegetableBroth_pg.html
http://www.health.com/health/gallery/0,,20569920_6,00.html
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005, page 9 (13 in PDF):
"Unsuitable fluids
"A few fluids are potentially dangerous and should be avoided during diarrhoea. Especially important are drinks sweetened with sugar, which can cause osmotic diarrhoea and hypernatraemia. Some examples are: • commercial carbonated beverages • commercial fruit juices • sweetened tea."
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005, page 9 (13 in PDF):
"Unsuitable fluids . . . "Other fluids to avoid are those with stimulant, diuretic or purgative effects, for example: • coffee • some medicinal teas or infusions."
Good work. I think there needs to be a mention that most of the current cases are in Kansai, but i don`t have a reference yet...best wishes andycjp ( talk) 16:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
That wasn't me. I've undid the IP edit that removed the table. Tim Vickers ( talk) 20:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to 2009 swine flu outbreak. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you.
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to 2009 swine flu outbreak. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 00:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thankssss.... Yess!!!... with SOURCES, I want to tell the world what's happening with the flu here in Argentina, what She and He don't want to tell. :D BUT ALWAYS WITH SOURCES -- 190.50.114.22 ( talk) 01:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, xD... you're from Argentina too?... ey ... Argentina on this map [1] should be with another color ... +50 -- 190.50.114.22 ( talk) 01:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below. At 2009 swine flu outbreak, per a complaint at WP:AN3. EdJohnston ( talk) 03:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Cool Nerd ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I have stayed polite throughout. The article has to stay easily updatable on a chronological basis, or else it's not useful. And most of all, Swine Flu 2009 is a potential public health crisis, so far merely potentially.
Decline reason:
Doesn't cover what's typically expected in a well thought out request (there's a guide linked to in the block template). But regardless this is a short block, so take the time to gather your thoughts and ensure you have a grasp on the policy. Nja 247 07:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Cool Nerd has been trying to change the article to adopt a more news-like format. In the thread where this was clearly discussed on the Talk page, a majority were against this change. Hmwith, Wikiwatcher1, Tim Vickers, Leevanjackson and LeadSongDog were against the change, and only you spoke in favor of it. I have no objection to another admin lifting the block early early if you agree to stop trying to change the page format without getting consensus on the Talk page first. I won't be available for a few hours so can't address the matter till then. EdJohnston ( talk) 05:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Discussion pages are typically cul-de-sacs. It's where people discuss things, sometimes very thoughtfully, and then no one ever responds to them. Usually.
So, I skimmed the comments, made a brief comment and that was that. People seemed to be making the argument
including news item --> problem
including news item --> imperfection
Well, what about the problem of not including it? Namely, that we are going to fail to communicate with our readers--when we easily could. My method is transparent. The chart and the map are not. Those take a heroic effort to keep up. And even then, it is not obvious what is up-to-date and what isn't. My method is also easy. It invites new readers to participate.
As far as being in a minority, it doesn't particularly bother me. Okay, Ed, you have to work quickly and make a decision on the base numbers. That's fine as far as it goes. And yeah, it's only 24 hours. But I am hoping that at a certain point you, if you have an real interest in Swine Flu 2009, or other people will look at the actual content of the arguments.
So, far, the conversation has been a largely disconnected.
I say, 'Hey, our current rules don't really helpfully apply to this current situation . . .'
Someone else says, 'The current rules are . . . '
Maybe that's the beginning of a conversation. Or maybe not even that.
I would rather have goals than rules. 'We attempt to give the complete story with references.' What is wrong with that?
And we are going to not give people complete and up-to-date information because it's somehow messy or disorderly?
The real rules of wikipedia seem to be "formality," "stilted," and "we're practicing for school (and/or the corporate world)"
Rules that are useful are distillations from experience. And even then, we have to adopt to changes in circumstances, changes in technology, etc.
So, what I'm going to do is to attempt to find some teammates. I'm guess I'm going to attempt to find some fellow radicals. Although I think of myself squarely as a middle-of-the-roader, maybe things are so formal . . . that perhaps I am a radical.
And where people really talk are in the short comments in the history section. This is a pretty good current practice. I think we should roll with this. Perhaps try to augment it with other avenue, but keep it as one good option.
Swine Flu is a rapidly evolving story that could break bad at any time. Hopefully, it won't. But it could. Cool Nerd ( talk) 21:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
About the Space Shuttle Challenger and the Space Shuttle Columbia, as talked about in the System Accident article and discussion page, why did the engineers not push their point harder? All of the above! Cool Nerd ( talk) 21:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that is right, tamiflu is a transition state analogue of sialic acid so inhibits cleavage of these sugars and prevents viral release from infected cells. However, that is nothing to do with the human immune response to influenza since, although neutralising antibodies are produced to both neuraminidase (N) and haemaglutanin (H), amino acid substitutions that confer resistance to the drug would be in the active site of neuraminidase, not on the surface of the protein, and would be unlikely to change the antigenicity of the protein. Tim Vickers ( talk) 22:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The section title in Talk:2009 swine flu outbreak#Victoria, Australia has stopped widespread testing. And this part deleted, but our article depends so heavily on numbers is very long. It can cause the title to appear distorted on low resolutions and makes the TOC really wide. It makes it easier and neater to just use short titles, then just elaborate in the text of the section. hmwith τ 20:57, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I was about to go to bed about 1 1/2 hours ago. Mind you, it is 3:30 here and I have to work tomorrow morning. But let's make a good article soon! Will be back on Monday or Tuesday. FHessel ( talk) 01:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Sure, let's give it a go and see what happens. Tim Vickers ( talk) 02:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Here are some good links:
|
The only thing I really had issue with was the statement that not taking it "right" somehow causes resistance. Even though this is a persistent belief there does not seem to be evidence. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 00:40, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
(undent) the info on when to go to the hospital is on the treatment sub page. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 03:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I do very much endorse including good info from the WHO in the article, but could you please summarize rather than adding long direct quotes? Also, the WHO doesn't necessarily need dedicated sections just for its comments on stuff. -- Cybercobra (talk) 02:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
The article Swine Flu, Current Situation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
Proposed Deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Abce2|
If you would
like to make a call..
20:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Swine Flu, Current Situation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
MuffledThud (
talk)
20:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Swine Flu H1N1, WHO Recommendations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
fetch
comms
☛
20:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Fetchcomms,
Unlike SARS or West Nile which struck me as mainly hype, H1N1 strikes me as potentially very serious indeed , and I have worked on this issue for the last six months. I have been frequently stymied by the overly formal style of wiki . . . I don't think we're giving parents our best work at all, and parents would be our most demanding readers. "Students writing papers" are likely to be among our least demanding readers, anything written in formal style's going to be acceptable whether it has glaring omissions or not.
I would ask you to consider this commitment: if I can demonstrate to a reasonable degree, civil standard, more likely than not, 51%, that quoting excerpts from WHO, in fact quoting rather long excerpts from WHO is allowable under fair use, can I count on you to welcome experiments in less formal style and less standing between the reader and the information?
I also want to look at news articles, for example:
That's written in lively style. The only thing I would be doing is sanding it down. I would not be doing parents, or anyone else, a favor.
The hard part of it is that this is only 30% of it. The other 70% of severe cases is direct viral pneumonia. And that pattern is not as obvious, but we still need to talk about it, with the best information we can find. The topic is hard enough as it is.
Would you in fact be willing to take a good long look at fair use with me?
And copyright for the above NYTimes article? Well, we're doing it for education purposes. It's 41 words out of 609. And "nature of copyrighted work," another part of the four-part balancing test, it's from the New York Times, which does sell subscriptions, but it's way back from the beginning of September. We have not scooped them. If anything, if anything it seems to me that we have promoted their writer Denise Grady.
But there would be longer excerpts, shorter time horizons. And health articles probably do have a longer shelf life than pop culture articles.
Cool Nerd ( talk) 00:25, 24 November 2009 (UTC) (reposted on my talk page)
From our article Fair Use:
" . . . Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
- the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- the nature of the copyrighted work;
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. [1] . . . "
I have deleted the article you created, Swine Flu, Current Situation, because the article was created by copypasting text from copyrighted articles. Wikipedia allows the use of brief quotations of copyrighted text when properly attributed. However, entire articles or substantial portions of them created by copypasting text, even when attributed and placed in quotations, is not permitted -- and will not meet any "fair use" rationale. If you wish to include new information in Wikipedia, I would suggest that you add it to one of the Swine flu articles, using your own words, with references to the appropriate sources. Thanks. — CactusWriter | needles 20:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I know your heart is in the right place, but copyright violations don't help anyone. We want people to respect Wikipedia's license, therefore we in turn should obey other people's copyright. Contrary to what you say, it doesn't necessarily take expertise to summarize what experts say; just look at the new Diagnostic section I added to 2009 flu pandemic, it just takes careful reading and some application of the simple "school skills" you mentioned. -- Cybercobra (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hey NC you seem to agree strongly on this new approach. I think your idea of creating a subpage to displace this approach and garner feedback from the group is a good one. I assume you will use a sub page of your user page?
WRT copyright: Well the US gov releases much of what they create into the public domain most of the rest of the world ( governments, WHO, etc ) do not. Therefore using large amounts of these materials may tread on some toes. It is also easy enough to reword it.
Having a list of guidelines with the date they came out could be a subpage of public health. This is not really an encylopedic format though. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Took the liberty of creating a subpage were this can be worked on and discussed. User:Cool_Nerd/Sandbox Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks for notifying me. Even under fair use, Wikipedia has a policy against direct copy-pasting information. The article needs sources, but should not be completely copy-pasted, regardless of copyrights or anything. An article that consists solely of a quote isn't really permissible either way. I personally don't find Wikipedia's tone formal, though it is an encyclopedia and should be written as such. See, what you need to do is find the articles, as you have been doing, and put them in your own words. That's the point of Wikipedia, to present such information from reliable external sources but not in complete, unchanged quotes. Therefore, I applaud your efforts to help, but you should realize that regardless of fair use or anything related, you simply cannot create articles consisting of mainly or only copy/pasted text from other articles. I would be more than happy to help with any articles you wish to create though, granted that they do not violate our guidelines and policies, of course. Thanks again, fetch comms ☛ 00:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Do you understand where I'm going with this? I know that this is an important article--but it's not for Wikipedia as-is. (Also, you don't need to post your messages on both mine and your talk pages, one is fine. But if you reply here, be sure to tell me on my page, thanks)-- fetch comms ☛ 02:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Try focusing more on the text. Make comments on the talkpage such as "I think we should say statement A in wording A rather than statement B in wording B." I'm afraid your comments are often hard for me to follow, since you discuss the subject broadly and at length as if we were sitting about having coffee! :) While this is friendly and I'm sure well-intentioned, it does make things rather unfocused and hinders discussions about specific parts of the text. Anyway, that's my advice - feel free to take it or leave it. Tim Vickers ( talk) 21:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I have written about our editing problem on Tim's page. I look forward to speaking with you on his page, and once again having a good relationship. Gandydancer ( talk) 13:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
‘ . . . In a country where the virus is circulating, we have 3 updated recommendations.
‘1. Firstly, people in at-risk groups need to be treated with antivirals as soon as possible when they have flu symptoms. This includes pregnant women, children under 2 years old, and people with “underlying conditions” such as respiratory problems.
‘2. Secondly, people who are not from the at-risk group but who have persistent or rapidly worsening symptoms should also be treated with antivirals. These symptoms include difficulty breathing and a high fever that lasts beyond 3 days.
‘3. Thirdly, people who have already developed pneumonia should be given both antivirals and antibiotics, as we have seen that, in many severe cases of H1N1-caused illness, bacterial infection develops. These medicines, antivirals and antibiotics, if used in a timely manner, can help save lives.
‘I want to stress that people who are not from the at-risk group and who have only typical cold need not take antivirals. . . ’ (page 1)
' . . . The pandemic virus can cause severe pneumonia even in healthy young people, though rather minor in proportion, and the virus can take life within a week. The window of opportunity is very narrow to reverse the progression of the disease. The medicine needs to be administered before the virus destroys the lungs. . . ' (page 2, second paragraph)
Hospitalized Patients with 2009 H1N1 Influenza in the United States, April–June 2009, New England Journal of Medicine, Jain, Kamimoto, et al., Nov. 12, 2009:
“ . . . the only variable that was significantly associated with a positive outcome was the receipt of antiviral drugs within 2 days after the onset of illness.” (Outcomes, second paragraph)
" . . . In our study, only 73% of patients with radiographic evidence of pneumonia received antiviral drugs, whereas 97% received antibiotics. In the absence of accurate diagnostic methods, patients who are hospitalized with suspected influenza and lung infiltrates on chest radiography should be considered for treatment with both antibiotics and antiviral drugs. . . " (Discussion, 8th paragraph)
“ . . . The benefits of treatment are probably greatest when such therapy is started early, but antiviral drugs should not be withheld if patients present more than 48 hours after the onset of symptoms. . . ” (Discussion, last paragraph)
posted by Cool Nerd ( talk) 17:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC), revised and added to Cool Nerd ( talk) 02:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Report Finds Swine Flu Has Killed 36 Children, New York Times, DENISE GRADY, September 3, 2009:
“ . . . In children without chronic health problems, it is a warning sign if they seem to recover from the flu but then relapse with a high fever, Dr. Frieden said. The relapse may be bacterial pneumonia, which must be treated with antibiotics. . . . ”
When to take a sick child to the ER Children and youths are especially hard-hit by swine flu. It is important to watch for danger signs, as the onset of respiratory failure can be swift, Los Angeles Times, Rong-Gong Lin II, November 21, 2009:
‘ . . . "Is there something really different about your child that's different from the seven or eight viral infections your kid gets every year? Those are the changes to look out for," said Dr. Mark Morocco, associate residency director for emergency medicine at UCLA.
‘Warning signs include significant difficulty breathing; inability to drink fluids or urinate for more than six hours; change in the color of the mouth or lips; or unusual behavioral changes, such as a crying child who cannot be consoled, or a child who doesn't wake up or walk or talk normally. . . . ’
Warning center learns from miscalculation, Honolulu Advertiser, Gordon Y.K. Pang, Advertiser Staff Writer, Feb. 28, 2010:
‘ . . . DART gauges spread across the sea floor to detect the size of tsunami waves are a fairly new technology, Fryer said. The initial wave reading from the DART gauge showed 25 centimeters, huge for the deep water, he said.
‘"At that point, we went to full Pacific-wide warning," he said. "Part of the reason we had to do that was because although it was huge, we didn't quite know what it meant because we haven't much experience with those. As we get more under our belts, we'll get better."
‘He added: "Fifty percent error, that's OK. That's about the level of accuracy in this game. It will get better."
‘Nonetheless, "with every event the system improves," Fryer said. . . ’
'The last wave almost wiped the village off the map', The Irish Times, MARIO NARANJO in Dichato, Tuesday, March 2, 2010:
‘ . . . The first two surges startled the town’s 7,000 residents, who had already been violently awakened by the earthquake that wrought destruction across a swathe of central Chile. But it was the third surge, a huge wall of water, that tore up and smashed houses, swept cars out to sea, and sucked people’s possessions into the sea, destroying more than three-quarters of the town’s buildings.
‘“The last one almost wiped the village off the map,” said David Merino, surrounded by a scene of water-logged destruction in the village, which was among the closest settlements to the 8.8-magnitude quake.
‘It was still unclear how many people died in Dichato, where distraught residents wandered the town trying to salvage possessions and gazing at their ruined homes. . . ’
" . . . It was found that the accident was not the result of a chance malfunction in a statistical sense, but rather resulted from an unusual combination of mistakes, coupled with a somewhat deficient and unforgiving design. [Emphasis added] . . . "
.
.
"c. In addition, it is probable that the tank contained a loosely fitting fill tube assembly. [Emphasis added] This assembly was probably displaced during subsequent handling, which included an incident at the prime contractor's plant in which the tank was jarred. [Emphasis added]
.
.
"f. The special detanking procedures at KSC subjected the tank to an extended period of heater operation and pressure cycling. [Emphasis added] These procedures had not been used before, and the tank had not been qualified by test for the conditions experienced. However, the procedures did not violate the specifications [Emphasis added] which governed the operation of the heaters at KSC.
.
"h. A number of factors contributed to the presence of inadequate thermostatic switches in the heater assembly. The original 1962 specifications from NR to Beech Aircraft [Emphasis added] Corporation for the tank and heater assembly specified the use of 28 V [Emphasis added] dc power, which is used in the spacecraft. In 1965, NR issued a revised specification [Emphasis added] which stated that the heaters should use a 65 V [Emphasis added] dc power supply for tank pressurization; this was the power supply used at KSC to reduce pressurization time. Beech ordered switches for the Block II tanks but did not change the switch specifications to be compatible with 65 V dc.
.
.
.
"l. As shown by subsequent tests, failure of the thermostatic switches probably permitted the temperature of the heater tube assembly to reach about 1000° F in spots during the continuous 8-hour period of heater operation. Such heating has been shown by tests to severely damage the Teflon insulation on the fan motor wires in the vicinity of the heater assembly. From that time on, including pad occupancy, the oxygen tank no. 2 was in a hazardous condition [Emphasis added] when filled with oxygen and electrically powered.
"m. It was not until nearly 56 hours into the mission, however, that the fan motor wiring, possibly moved by the fan stirring, short circuited and ignited its insulation [Emphasis added] by means of an electric arc. The resulting combustion in the oxygen tank probably overheated and failed the wiring conduit where it enters the tank, and possibly a portion of the tank itself.
. . . "
REPORT OF APOLLO 13 REVIEW BOARD ("Cortright Report"), Chair Edgar M. Cortright, CHAPTER 5, FINDINGS, DETERMINATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS, see pages 5-1 through 5-3. See also Apollo 13 Review Board which has the table of contents for the entire report.
Can you please revert your last edit to Apollo 13? I see you've been around about as long as I have and done about as much editing--we're no experts, but have a little experience under our belts. My understanding of the way to write an article--and I can't find a page that says this--is that the lead summarizes and introduces the whole article. It doesn't replace information; that information needs to be repeated in its proper place, although it's hardly considered repeating. The lead is an introduction, while the article should be complete in itself without the lead. Thanks. -- Yopienso ( talk) 04:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
"Oxygen tank #2 fans on. Stabilization control system electrical disturbance indicated a power transient. 055:53:20
.
.
. . . It was at this time that the crew heard a loud bang. 055:54:53.555"
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_13h_Timeline.htm
There was a fair amount going on between these two events.
On 16 August 2010, I made the change in our Apollo 13 article, from "Suddenly, . . " to "Approximately 93 seconds later . . " Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I think a large part of the answer is that we spend so much time and energy on the formality of the writing itself, at the expense of accuracy and breadth of coverage. Cool Nerd ( talk) 16:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi Middayexpress, it's been good working with you on the drought. I think we should be both nominated for bronze stars if there's a reputable way to do so! And if we sometimes come at things from different angles, I think that's a positive.
Okay, the above is big, and I think we've got to include it. In fact, I think we should try and recruit some help if we can. For example, JimSukwutput used to be a regular contributor but perhaps got busy with other things.
I made some recent additions to our discussion page "41 Nov. 2011 Unicef press release . . . " I'm going to think about it a little and then probably add it to our main article. Please help if you have the time. And let's do see if we can recruit some other editors and researchers. Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear Author/Cool Nerd
My name is Nuša Farič and I am a Health Psychology MSc student at the University College London (UCL). I am currently running a quantitative study entitled Who edits health-related Wikipedia pages and why? I am interested in the editorial experience of people who edit health-related Wikipedia pages. I am interested to learn more about the authors of health-related pages on Wikipedia and what motivations they have for doing so. I am currently contacting the authors of randomly selected articles and I noticed that someone at this address edited an article on Influenza. I would like to ask you a few questions about you and your experience of editing the above mentioned article and or other health-related articles. If you would like more information about the project, please visit my user page ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hydra_Rain) and if interested, please reply via my talk page or e-mail me on nusa.faric.11@ucl.ac.uk. Also, others interested in the study may contact me! If I do not hear back from you I will not contact this account again. Thank you very much in advance. Hydra Rain ( talk) 13:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello Cool Nerd.
Thanks for your invitation about H7N9. But I am sad to tell you that I could not help you at the moment because I think I am still not the right person for you to have.
Thanks for your understanding.
Regards, 123sage321 ( talk)
Hi cool nerd, You're cool! I currently have a fever and have had diarrhea all day and your contributions have been helping me learn how to take care of myself. Thank you NIRVANA2764 ( talk) 22:13, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
And hope you get feeling better. :>) Cool Nerd ( talk) 16:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
You must paraphrase the content you use. Have reverted some of your edits as it was word for word the same as this source from WHO [3] Good source but paraphrasing needed. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
http://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/SAM_Guideline.pdf Starting at page 18 (19 in PDF). Cool Nerd ( talk) 19:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Actually, my favorite jobs have been in retail management and sales! So, yeah, I'm a furniture sales guy diving into health topics.
I take a good source, excerpt it, and summarize it. And you, too, can help out with health topics. :~) Cool Nerd ( talk) 18:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
13:07, 15 February 2015 (UTC)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)
16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
00:06, 9 March 2017 (UTC)The gist of the matter seems to be the phrase "infants who do not breastfeed are up to six times more likely to die from." And yes, it is embarrassing. It was not my goal for it to end up this way. I don't think I copied it in its entirely for I usually cut and paste in the white space below my active work area phrases such as:
That is, primarily phrases which have numbers. And then in my active work area, I rewrite in my own words. At least, I usually do. I remembering wanting to include why formula feeding is often less safe. Yes, the WHO article talked about clean water. But I know that there's a whole second issue that lower-income families can't really afford to buy enough product, so they frequently water it down in an effort to stretch the product, just like you or I might do if in the same situation. But this wasn't in this particular WHO page, so I didn't include it. Yes, I might have copied and pasted that one sentence because I was focusing on other things, but I don't think I did. I think it's equally likely that I did rewrite it and then changed it back during my second rewrite for better flow! All I can promise is fewer steps in the future. I might skip the second rewrite for the sake of simplicity. I know enough about complications and system accidents to make this change. Fewer steps, not more steps. And please notice that I did add "and families may or may not have dependable access to clean water" to make a longer, compound sentence. I know that's not enough. But I was in there trying. It was not an intentional mistake.
Doc James, the other sentence you put in boldface, I in fact did rewrite.
My version is: "In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) states that if an HIV-positive mother breastfeeds her infant for two years without medication, 14–20% of infants will become infected." I think that's a good paraphrase. If you think it's not acceptable, I'd very much like to hear your reasoning. Cool Nerd ( talk) 19:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I think Wikipedia can be so much more than it currently is, and I've occasionally presented my case and at times probably argued my case. I realize that I don't have majority support, so I do follow the current rules.
I have more than 10 years of good edits, and I've worked on health topics since 2009. Cool Nerd ( talk) 20:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
As part of our Primary School research project, an external HIV expert gave a good dozen specific suggestion for improving the article in Feb. 2016. /info/en/?search=Talk:HIV
To his or her credit, one person implement two of these recommendations: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=HIV&diff=704587934&oldid=704120893 https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=HIV&diff=next&oldid=704587934
And more than a year later, I made this change: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=HIV&diff=769311394&oldid=768587512
I removed the parts where the expert wrote "are, I think, nonsense" and then added back the references to our "Further reading" in my next edit
Potential conclusions:
1) The Talk page just does not receive that much attention, no matter how good a particular section might be.
2) We're pretty much at the limits of our abilities right now.
3) Wikipedia is often like the Telephone Game. One person whispers to another who whispers to another, etc, etc, maybe five deep, maybe more. For example, how often do you check whether a couple of sentences in an article accurately summarizes a footnote used versus rewriting for the sake of flow, clarity, or formal language?
So, yes, wiki is very much a work in progress, and we still have a fair amount of work to do. Cool Nerd ( talk) 20:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Cool Nerd. 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.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)