BIO | This user's favourite subject is Biology. |
Hi. It looks to me like you're very serious about this project, and that you probably won't mind picky (negative) comments. Looking at your draft of the article, I react to the word "resulting" in "due to a squeaking sound sometimes resulting from the joint". Can a sound result from a joint? It's probably possible to find a better word or phrase.
Sentence "This build up is surgically removed most of the time." needs improvement. See also paragraph below about surgery.
"It has been theorized that the increase in osteochondritis dissecans may be associated with increased participation in sports." What increase? In an individual, in society? Increased from what to what? (Partly explained in the following section, I see. Perhaps combine or move some info. Also, it may be good to give an indication of usual age at presentation/diagnosis nearer the top of the article.) Another thought: should osteochondritis dissecans be italicized throughout? (I don't know the answer to that question - take a look at lots of articles about conditions with similarly non-English names.)
"your pains ", "your blood stream " --oops, we don't write to "you" on Wikipedia. Easy to re-phrase. You'll need to consider throughout whether to refer to "one's pains" instead of "your", or to "patients", "sufferers", or to "people/an individual/a person with the condition" etc. Variation is good. Some people really don't like the word "sufferer".
I think physiotherapy is all-one-word, and it can, as such, be wikilinked. Advice: always check the article you're linking to, to see if it is indeed pertinent, and to avoid redirects and disambiguation pages.
"then surgery is necessary. There is an estimated 50% chance that this treatment will work without surgical intervention." Though some people who?[;-)] criticize weasel words, it is usually wise to moderate such statements as "is necessary" to "may be necessary", "often is indicated" or the like. The second sentence quoted needs a reference. Keep in mind, too, that Wikipedia articles are supposed to apply worldwide. "Necessary" surgery is hardly an option for most(?) people.
"disturbance of the usual growth process" Does "usual" here mean "normal"?
A quote such as "well recognized but poorly understood" needs citing.
Well, I got carried away here, with my red pencil. Most of this you'd have figured out yourself. Hope some of it helps. Cheers, -- Hordaland ( talk) 11:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You are well ahead of the pack on this one. For most of the class at his point - I simply am hoping for a confidence builder in the creation and editing of their user page.
Take a look at the Introduction to Evolution entry. We linked the in-text citations to the Book reference in an indirect way. Look in the Notes and find the author Diamond. See how that is linked first: from the in text citation; yet clicking on his name takes you to the Book references. Like everything else, I stole the codes without actually understanding the logic. Ex. ref>( Diamond 1992, p. 16) </ref was the in-text citation format less the first and last < and >. Then this code was pasted for the actual book under References: {citation |last= Diamond |first= Jared |year= 1992 |authorlink=Jared Diamond |title= The Third Chimpanzee: the evolution and future of the human animal|publisher= HarperCollins |location= New York |isbn= 0060183071 } less the first and last { and } to keep from being an html here. Not easy to explain... get with me in class. -- JimmyButler ( talk) 02:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Images from medical journals are usually copyrighted by either the journal or the authors, and usually both. Moreover, if the images display a person this person may have given consent for its publication in a journal, but not necessarily in other outlets. It can therefore be very hard to find suitable images for medical articles.
A small number of medical journals subscribes to the Creative Commons philosophy (e.g. the journal Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases), and these images may be uploaded to Wikipedia under the relevant license. Alternatively, you may need to draw diagrams yourself, or contact the authors of recent journal articles if they would like to send you an image that can be uploaded under the GFDL, CC or even public domain. JFW | T@lk 20:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
You've been doing a great job, but I noticed this, so I wanted to steer you towards Wikipedia:Footnotes#Naming_a_ref_tag_so_it_can_be_used_more_than_once. (If you use this tool, it automatically handles this issue for you.) -- Arcadian ( talk) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Hi FoodPuma, I'm Prom3th3an and I am a experienced editor and helper of wikipedia. I have recently discovered your class's wikiproject and would like to thankyou for taking the time to contribute to Wikipedia with (what I can tell) upmost enthusiasm. Your effort is greatly appreciated. I look forward to seeing the end result of your article mid next year and most likly drop in and offer advice to you along the way as I am freely available to answer any quires you may have. A final word of advice would be WP:BEBOLD. All the Best «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l» (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC) |
Your choice of edit summary of Help!, had me running there and I failed to see any problem ! I think your edit summary should have been more along lines "I must not imply ownership", however frustrated at yourself you may have been :-)
So anything I can help out with ? David Ruben Talk 23:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I might be able to review your nom this weekend ...but to tell the truth, getting through the GA backlog is a part of Wikipedia's reality. It can sometimes take several weeks. The best way to get an article reviewed is to review other articles. So roll up your sleeves and reduce the overall backlog by reviewing any article that interests you. Many reviewers are in high school themselves. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 02:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
You're doing a great job, but I wanted to point out: in this edit, you correctly added the citation to PMID 3316236, but you copied content directly from the abstract into the Wiki article. You'd need to either put the content into your own words, or put the phrase in quotation marks. -- Arcadian ( talk) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thought it only proper to indicate the GA nomination for you at your project page thus :-) David Ruben Talk 22:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Permission to reproduce from emedicine: do you have proof for such a claim? eMedicine is copyrighted, if you have obtained permission via email, you should send it to WP:OTRS. -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 19:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. You can upload your arthroscopy images in Commons:Category:Arthroscopy. -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 20:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Copyrighted material is reproduced here with their Permission." -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 21:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there FoodPuma!
| |
---|---|
Please accept this invite to join the Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving articles to GA status while working with other users. We hope to see you there! |
Good work. Ling.Nut ( talk— WP:3IAR) 09:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
If you want...though I'll warn you that I hate biology and so I know nothing about it—never took any bio classes! —Ed
17
for President
Vote for Ed 16:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Puma! I saw from your contribs that you haven't edited since the 26th! If you decided to hang it up and leave, then good luck in your future endeavors, friend....and if you haven't but you are on vacation or something, then sorry for being stupid. :) —Ed 17 for President Vote for Ed 02:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I figured I'd drop by and ask a favor. I'm attempting to sort all of my Osteitis fibrosa cystica research into manageable, bite-sized pieces, and failing miserably. How did you decide on an outline/format for your article, and how did you streamline your research to match? Strombollii ( talk) 17:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, what exactly is the difference between a pathophysiology section and a symptoms section?-- Strombollii ( talk) 17:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Max - thanks for stepping up and showing them how it's done! You've cleared the way of all excuses! -- JimmyButler ( talk) 00:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC) |
So now that you're in GA nomination, and the stress is slowly starting to cease... Lets adopt another article, eh? Strombollii ( talk) 03:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
[2] Great work, pal. :) — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 17:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Well done for taking a difficult topic and working so hard to give the article breadth & depth. Its been a joy to see you work up through the learning curve of researching a topic, coming to grips with scientific writing and the finer details of wikipedia's publishing model. Few editors get articles to GA status, so I do hope you stick around after the needs of your course work and contribute to other topics.
Now not that any "invite" is needed, but seems only polite to offer you the {{ MedInvitation}} tag :-)
If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the
Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in contributing more to medical related articles you may want to join
WikiProject Medicine (signup
here).
David Ruben
Talk 01:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
The Resilient Barnstar | ||
To FoodPuma, for improving " Osteochondritis dissecans". Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review in the hopes that I may nominate it as a Feature Article Candidate. While well-referenced with the information presented, I am sure it could use some elaboration on section such as "Prognosis." Your input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, Food Puma 23:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
The "Bibliography" textbooks don't have many citations in the article. It would be preferable to use in-line book citations. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article. Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
FoodPuma,
I wish you and your family all the best this Christmas and that you also have a Happy and safe new year.
Thankyou for all your contributions to Wikipedia this year and I look forward to seeing many more from you in the future.
Your work around Wikipedia has not gone un-noticed, this notice is testimony to that
Please feel free to drop by my talkpage any time to say Hi, as I will probably say Hi back :)
All the Best.
«l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»
(talk)
Thanks for all the help, I'll continue editing and sent two emails to the respective imageholders. The flickr one was copyright protected too =[.
Books? Hmm. I recently read The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil, which is a political allegory and also absolutely hilarious. The Blind Watchmaker is incredible, but I really haven't made much progress in it. For an actual story, I recommend Blindness by Jose Saramago, which is new, but downright amazing; or Bright Lights Big City which is impossible to find, but phenomenal -- it's a pseudo-existential stream-of-conscious book about a depressed guy. If you're a fan of Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country has recently graced my "read" list and managed to be both insightful and hilarious, while Lynne Truss' Talk to the Hand: The Utter Bloody Rudeness of the World is just mean. Strombollii ( talk) 01:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I saw on the project discussion page you listed a link for medical images and I was wondering how you put one in your article? I found an image I like for Brain ischemia but I don't know if it is okay to use? Speaking of the copyright and what not. Do you think you could help me out? Thanks, -- Saunc2011 ( talk) 16:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately I'm short in time right now, won't be able to do much... sorry. cheers, -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 07:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
YO, thanks for helping me with the penguins...the sites you gave and all that are really helpful. Can you tell me how to use one source 2 or more times in the article? You're not supposed to just list it twice, are you?-- LNG123 ( talk) 18:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all the help... just got GA =] Strombollii ( talk) 23:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I only added the link to the Twinkle tool for a colleague of mine who is actively editing the Dwarfism article. He has voiced some complaints over the rampant vandalism of said article and I was merely putting a link to the Twinkle tool that I mentioned to him. I can, however, simply post this link on his talk page and bypass your unnecessary revert process if I care to. I suggest you take the time to actually look before you go reverting next time, perhaps the material provided is of benefit. Cheers! FoodPuma 01:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
The most recent thread on your entry captures the true nature of Wikipedia; perhaps you can better understand why I was up at three in the morning responding to concerns and criticisms to the point of obsession. I'm beyond pleased at your efforts and diplomacy. Your responses are accommodating; yet, you stand firm on your own perspectives. Your FAC should prove interesting; especially if "readability" becomes a point of contention. Fortunately you have the support of a very active and talented group of editors. I think it is time to take the leap of faith! -- JimmyButler ( talk) 22:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I just reviewed the OCD article and posted an oppose. Don't freak! Stay cool. FAC is an important part of the process of developing an article to FA quality. If critical reviews did not help, and help a lot, few of us would bother writing them, because writing them is hard work. Your job is to set aside any feelings of dismay and use critical reviews to the utmost, to improve the article. Already one oppose (conditional) has switched to support, and that is by far the most valuable support the article has obtained so far. My reviews often do lead to major reorganizing and rewriting the lede, both jobs some editors really hate doing, but the result can be a far better article. -- Una Smith ( talk) 08:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
"It's position as a fringe medical article makes even the doctors over at ... WP:MED feel too uncomfortable to review"
— FoodPuma
You shouldn't assume this. The doctors at WP:MED are busy people with important real-life commitments. Axl ¤ [Talk] 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Osteochondritis dissecans now is rated FA. Congratulations! -- Una Smith ( talk) 17:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Yay, way to go! - guess you get to pick a different MCOTW nomination - and then get it to FA before we get there ;) LeeVJ ( talk) 19:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
An amazing accomplishment:
The Resilient Barnstar | ||
Your tenacity and perseverance in pursuit of FA will set the standards for those students to follow! JimmyButler ( talk) 18:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC) |
The E=mc² Barnstar | ||
To a fellow scientist, well done FoodPuma, Graham. Graham Colm Talk 19:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC) |
What a grand occasion - osteochondritis dissecans featured. I feel a bit guilty for not being more helpful in the initial stages, but it looks like your hard work has carried it through. Carry on the excellent work! JFW | T@lk 21:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Congrats. Excellent work. Raul654 ( talk) 18:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
-- Wikitrevor ( talk) 21:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Congrats, puma. And thanks for all the help. Shall we throw down upon wikitrev's ascent to FA? My treat. Strombollii ( talk) 02:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Maen. K. A. ( talk) 09:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
-- MifterBot I ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 20:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Maen. K. A. ( talk) 09:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the support, MR. Strombollii ( talk) 22:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I am working on a list and wanted to know if you would proofread the text for me? If available, I would appreciate your feedback. Regardless, thank you for your help on wikipedia. kilbad ( talk) 00:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | ||
Although you became a Wikipedian because you had no choice, you went far beyond what is expected of any editor. You quickly figured out the weird ways of Wikipedia. You mentored your fellow project members. You brought your assigned article to FA. And, you did it all with the teamwork of your classmates and the wider Wikipedia community. Thanks for being here. Hope you stick around. Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 02:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC) |
BIO | This user's favourite subject is Biology. |
Hi. It looks to me like you're very serious about this project, and that you probably won't mind picky (negative) comments. Looking at your draft of the article, I react to the word "resulting" in "due to a squeaking sound sometimes resulting from the joint". Can a sound result from a joint? It's probably possible to find a better word or phrase.
Sentence "This build up is surgically removed most of the time." needs improvement. See also paragraph below about surgery.
"It has been theorized that the increase in osteochondritis dissecans may be associated with increased participation in sports." What increase? In an individual, in society? Increased from what to what? (Partly explained in the following section, I see. Perhaps combine or move some info. Also, it may be good to give an indication of usual age at presentation/diagnosis nearer the top of the article.) Another thought: should osteochondritis dissecans be italicized throughout? (I don't know the answer to that question - take a look at lots of articles about conditions with similarly non-English names.)
"your pains ", "your blood stream " --oops, we don't write to "you" on Wikipedia. Easy to re-phrase. You'll need to consider throughout whether to refer to "one's pains" instead of "your", or to "patients", "sufferers", or to "people/an individual/a person with the condition" etc. Variation is good. Some people really don't like the word "sufferer".
I think physiotherapy is all-one-word, and it can, as such, be wikilinked. Advice: always check the article you're linking to, to see if it is indeed pertinent, and to avoid redirects and disambiguation pages.
"then surgery is necessary. There is an estimated 50% chance that this treatment will work without surgical intervention." Though some people who?[;-)] criticize weasel words, it is usually wise to moderate such statements as "is necessary" to "may be necessary", "often is indicated" or the like. The second sentence quoted needs a reference. Keep in mind, too, that Wikipedia articles are supposed to apply worldwide. "Necessary" surgery is hardly an option for most(?) people.
"disturbance of the usual growth process" Does "usual" here mean "normal"?
A quote such as "well recognized but poorly understood" needs citing.
Well, I got carried away here, with my red pencil. Most of this you'd have figured out yourself. Hope some of it helps. Cheers, -- Hordaland ( talk) 11:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You are well ahead of the pack on this one. For most of the class at his point - I simply am hoping for a confidence builder in the creation and editing of their user page.
Take a look at the Introduction to Evolution entry. We linked the in-text citations to the Book reference in an indirect way. Look in the Notes and find the author Diamond. See how that is linked first: from the in text citation; yet clicking on his name takes you to the Book references. Like everything else, I stole the codes without actually understanding the logic. Ex. ref>( Diamond 1992, p. 16) </ref was the in-text citation format less the first and last < and >. Then this code was pasted for the actual book under References: {citation |last= Diamond |first= Jared |year= 1992 |authorlink=Jared Diamond |title= The Third Chimpanzee: the evolution and future of the human animal|publisher= HarperCollins |location= New York |isbn= 0060183071 } less the first and last { and } to keep from being an html here. Not easy to explain... get with me in class. -- JimmyButler ( talk) 02:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Images from medical journals are usually copyrighted by either the journal or the authors, and usually both. Moreover, if the images display a person this person may have given consent for its publication in a journal, but not necessarily in other outlets. It can therefore be very hard to find suitable images for medical articles.
A small number of medical journals subscribes to the Creative Commons philosophy (e.g. the journal Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases), and these images may be uploaded to Wikipedia under the relevant license. Alternatively, you may need to draw diagrams yourself, or contact the authors of recent journal articles if they would like to send you an image that can be uploaded under the GFDL, CC or even public domain. JFW | T@lk 20:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
You've been doing a great job, but I noticed this, so I wanted to steer you towards Wikipedia:Footnotes#Naming_a_ref_tag_so_it_can_be_used_more_than_once. (If you use this tool, it automatically handles this issue for you.) -- Arcadian ( talk) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Hi FoodPuma, I'm Prom3th3an and I am a experienced editor and helper of wikipedia. I have recently discovered your class's wikiproject and would like to thankyou for taking the time to contribute to Wikipedia with (what I can tell) upmost enthusiasm. Your effort is greatly appreciated. I look forward to seeing the end result of your article mid next year and most likly drop in and offer advice to you along the way as I am freely available to answer any quires you may have. A final word of advice would be WP:BEBOLD. All the Best «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l» (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC) |
Your choice of edit summary of Help!, had me running there and I failed to see any problem ! I think your edit summary should have been more along lines "I must not imply ownership", however frustrated at yourself you may have been :-)
So anything I can help out with ? David Ruben Talk 23:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I might be able to review your nom this weekend ...but to tell the truth, getting through the GA backlog is a part of Wikipedia's reality. It can sometimes take several weeks. The best way to get an article reviewed is to review other articles. So roll up your sleeves and reduce the overall backlog by reviewing any article that interests you. Many reviewers are in high school themselves. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 02:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
You're doing a great job, but I wanted to point out: in this edit, you correctly added the citation to PMID 3316236, but you copied content directly from the abstract into the Wiki article. You'd need to either put the content into your own words, or put the phrase in quotation marks. -- Arcadian ( talk) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thought it only proper to indicate the GA nomination for you at your project page thus :-) David Ruben Talk 22:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Permission to reproduce from emedicine: do you have proof for such a claim? eMedicine is copyrighted, if you have obtained permission via email, you should send it to WP:OTRS. -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 19:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. You can upload your arthroscopy images in Commons:Category:Arthroscopy. -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 20:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Copyrighted material is reproduced here with their Permission." -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 21:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there FoodPuma!
| |
---|---|
Please accept this invite to join the Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving articles to GA status while working with other users. We hope to see you there! |
Good work. Ling.Nut ( talk— WP:3IAR) 09:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
If you want...though I'll warn you that I hate biology and so I know nothing about it—never took any bio classes! —Ed
17
for President
Vote for Ed 16:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Puma! I saw from your contribs that you haven't edited since the 26th! If you decided to hang it up and leave, then good luck in your future endeavors, friend....and if you haven't but you are on vacation or something, then sorry for being stupid. :) —Ed 17 for President Vote for Ed 02:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I figured I'd drop by and ask a favor. I'm attempting to sort all of my Osteitis fibrosa cystica research into manageable, bite-sized pieces, and failing miserably. How did you decide on an outline/format for your article, and how did you streamline your research to match? Strombollii ( talk) 17:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, what exactly is the difference between a pathophysiology section and a symptoms section?-- Strombollii ( talk) 17:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Max - thanks for stepping up and showing them how it's done! You've cleared the way of all excuses! -- JimmyButler ( talk) 00:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC) |
So now that you're in GA nomination, and the stress is slowly starting to cease... Lets adopt another article, eh? Strombollii ( talk) 03:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
[2] Great work, pal. :) — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 17:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Well done for taking a difficult topic and working so hard to give the article breadth & depth. Its been a joy to see you work up through the learning curve of researching a topic, coming to grips with scientific writing and the finer details of wikipedia's publishing model. Few editors get articles to GA status, so I do hope you stick around after the needs of your course work and contribute to other topics.
Now not that any "invite" is needed, but seems only polite to offer you the {{ MedInvitation}} tag :-)
If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the
Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in contributing more to medical related articles you may want to join
WikiProject Medicine (signup
here).
David Ruben
Talk 01:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
The Resilient Barnstar | ||
To FoodPuma, for improving " Osteochondritis dissecans". Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review in the hopes that I may nominate it as a Feature Article Candidate. While well-referenced with the information presented, I am sure it could use some elaboration on section such as "Prognosis." Your input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks, Food Puma 23:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
The "Bibliography" textbooks don't have many citations in the article. It would be preferable to use in-line book citations. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article. Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
FoodPuma,
I wish you and your family all the best this Christmas and that you also have a Happy and safe new year.
Thankyou for all your contributions to Wikipedia this year and I look forward to seeing many more from you in the future.
Your work around Wikipedia has not gone un-noticed, this notice is testimony to that
Please feel free to drop by my talkpage any time to say Hi, as I will probably say Hi back :)
All the Best.
«l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»
(talk)
Thanks for all the help, I'll continue editing and sent two emails to the respective imageholders. The flickr one was copyright protected too =[.
Books? Hmm. I recently read The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil, which is a political allegory and also absolutely hilarious. The Blind Watchmaker is incredible, but I really haven't made much progress in it. For an actual story, I recommend Blindness by Jose Saramago, which is new, but downright amazing; or Bright Lights Big City which is impossible to find, but phenomenal -- it's a pseudo-existential stream-of-conscious book about a depressed guy. If you're a fan of Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country has recently graced my "read" list and managed to be both insightful and hilarious, while Lynne Truss' Talk to the Hand: The Utter Bloody Rudeness of the World is just mean. Strombollii ( talk) 01:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I saw on the project discussion page you listed a link for medical images and I was wondering how you put one in your article? I found an image I like for Brain ischemia but I don't know if it is okay to use? Speaking of the copyright and what not. Do you think you could help me out? Thanks, -- Saunc2011 ( talk) 16:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately I'm short in time right now, won't be able to do much... sorry. cheers, -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 07:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
YO, thanks for helping me with the penguins...the sites you gave and all that are really helpful. Can you tell me how to use one source 2 or more times in the article? You're not supposed to just list it twice, are you?-- LNG123 ( talk) 18:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for all the help... just got GA =] Strombollii ( talk) 23:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I only added the link to the Twinkle tool for a colleague of mine who is actively editing the Dwarfism article. He has voiced some complaints over the rampant vandalism of said article and I was merely putting a link to the Twinkle tool that I mentioned to him. I can, however, simply post this link on his talk page and bypass your unnecessary revert process if I care to. I suggest you take the time to actually look before you go reverting next time, perhaps the material provided is of benefit. Cheers! FoodPuma 01:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
The most recent thread on your entry captures the true nature of Wikipedia; perhaps you can better understand why I was up at three in the morning responding to concerns and criticisms to the point of obsession. I'm beyond pleased at your efforts and diplomacy. Your responses are accommodating; yet, you stand firm on your own perspectives. Your FAC should prove interesting; especially if "readability" becomes a point of contention. Fortunately you have the support of a very active and talented group of editors. I think it is time to take the leap of faith! -- JimmyButler ( talk) 22:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I just reviewed the OCD article and posted an oppose. Don't freak! Stay cool. FAC is an important part of the process of developing an article to FA quality. If critical reviews did not help, and help a lot, few of us would bother writing them, because writing them is hard work. Your job is to set aside any feelings of dismay and use critical reviews to the utmost, to improve the article. Already one oppose (conditional) has switched to support, and that is by far the most valuable support the article has obtained so far. My reviews often do lead to major reorganizing and rewriting the lede, both jobs some editors really hate doing, but the result can be a far better article. -- Una Smith ( talk) 08:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
"It's position as a fringe medical article makes even the doctors over at ... WP:MED feel too uncomfortable to review"
— FoodPuma
You shouldn't assume this. The doctors at WP:MED are busy people with important real-life commitments. Axl ¤ [Talk] 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Osteochondritis dissecans now is rated FA. Congratulations! -- Una Smith ( talk) 17:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Yay, way to go! - guess you get to pick a different MCOTW nomination - and then get it to FA before we get there ;) LeeVJ ( talk) 19:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
An amazing accomplishment:
The Resilient Barnstar | ||
Your tenacity and perseverance in pursuit of FA will set the standards for those students to follow! JimmyButler ( talk) 18:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC) |
The E=mc² Barnstar | ||
To a fellow scientist, well done FoodPuma, Graham. Graham Colm Talk 19:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC) |
What a grand occasion - osteochondritis dissecans featured. I feel a bit guilty for not being more helpful in the initial stages, but it looks like your hard work has carried it through. Carry on the excellent work! JFW | T@lk 21:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Congrats. Excellent work. Raul654 ( talk) 18:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
-- Wikitrevor ( talk) 21:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Congrats, puma. And thanks for all the help. Shall we throw down upon wikitrev's ascent to FA? My treat. Strombollii ( talk) 02:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Maen. K. A. ( talk) 09:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
-- MifterBot I ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 20:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Maen. K. A. ( talk) 09:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the support, MR. Strombollii ( talk) 22:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I am working on a list and wanted to know if you would proofread the text for me? If available, I would appreciate your feedback. Regardless, thank you for your help on wikipedia. kilbad ( talk) 00:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | ||
Although you became a Wikipedian because you had no choice, you went far beyond what is expected of any editor. You quickly figured out the weird ways of Wikipedia. You mentored your fellow project members. You brought your assigned article to FA. And, you did it all with the teamwork of your classmates and the wider Wikipedia community. Thanks for being here. Hope you stick around. Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 02:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC) |