Welcome!
Hello, Soomeh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Cheers.
Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab
04:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Mr Mesallum. I'm just dropping a note to explain why I removed your contribution from stroke. I agree that the concept of venous revascularisation is interesting and might benefit wider application. However, it is evident from your contributions that this is an experimental treatment that has not been widely studied. As a result, I cannot presently support its inclusion in the stroke article. Please discuss the issue on Talk:Stroke if you think I am wrong. JFW | T@lk 11:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
It's great to hear that you are a physician, and I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. I'll also clarify that I am not an administrator, I'm just another user like you. Even so, I have to abide by the rules that WikiProject Medicine have laid out.
You must understand that information cannot be added to our Wikipedia articles if it constitutes original research, i.e. research which has not yet been peer-reviewed through a source we consider reliable such as medical journals. If you can find such a source, you are welcome, in my opinion, to add the treatment to the article and state that it is experimental and that it is controversial. So far, this treatment has recieved little medical consensus and therefore the public should not be informed that is it a treatment option.
Please review the following topics and you may understand why we cannot include the information yet:
Many thanks, feel free to contact me again— CycloneNimrod T@lk? 12:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
You have been warned repeatedly by several individuals not to add information on arteriovenous switching to stroke. You have apparently ignored those warnings. Please review guidelines on medically reliable sources before adding the information yet again. Patents and patent applications are not suitable sources for medical articles on wikipedia. If the technology is tested and reported in a peer-reviewed journal, which would be considered a medically reliable sources, then it is suitable for inclusion on the stroke page. Until then, it is undue weight to keep inserting information on a device that is prospective and has not been tested or reported in a peer-reviewed journal. Currently the information amounts to little more than spamming and advertisement for the patents and repeated insertion of the information can result in a blocking of your account and the revocation of your editing privileges. If you are looking for a means to insert the information, I suggest you bring it up at the medicine wikiproject rather than repeatedly inserting the information against WP:CONSENSUS. This is a third-level warning, one more warning will result in your account being reported at the vandalism noticeboard and hence a block. WLU ( talk) 15:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Soomeh ( talk) 11:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I read my talkpage. You emailed me not just once but three times. You have left rude messages on the pages of other editors who have taken the trouble of explaining to you why your additions to stroke, while possibly of future interest, were not presently suitable for inclusion. Whether you're a board-certified MD or not, you cannot claim space on Wikipedia, especially when you are unwilling to collaborate on the most basic level.
Things will change when phase III studies on your technique have been conducted. Once that is the case, you are by all means free to suggest its inclusion on Talk:Stroke, where people without a conflict of interest will proceed to judge it on its merits. You can reply to my message here, or leave a rejoinder on my talkpage, but stop emailing me unless the matter is personal or sensitive. Thank you. JFW | T@lk 20:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
You have been doing some serious misquoting on all of our behalves ( Cyclonenim, JFW etc) and using some straw man arguments. I don't think you fully understand our position.
We have no issue with the treatment, I fully support the experimental treatment (i.e. not yet in Phase III trials, not yet verified by peers (i.e. consensus) etc); however, it is simply experimental. Compare your treatment to warfarin therapy or neurosurgical investigations in haemorrhagic stroke—is your's as well documented as these? Do other physicians know of your treatment as much as they know of these therapies? If not, it's unlikely that it's undergone the necessary validation and verification that treatments need before being recommended to patients.
This is the last I will say on the matter, we have explained to you in simple terms why you cannot add this information yet. It may be suitable for inclusion at a later date when trials have advanced and studies are more numerous and reliable. Consensus has not been achieved with the current studies, however the consensus here at Wikipedia is that this information is not suitable for inclusion. Please do not contact me again until you have resolved our concerns. — Cyclonenim T@lk? 14:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Soomeh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Cheers.
Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab
04:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Mr Mesallum. I'm just dropping a note to explain why I removed your contribution from stroke. I agree that the concept of venous revascularisation is interesting and might benefit wider application. However, it is evident from your contributions that this is an experimental treatment that has not been widely studied. As a result, I cannot presently support its inclusion in the stroke article. Please discuss the issue on Talk:Stroke if you think I am wrong. JFW | T@lk 11:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
It's great to hear that you are a physician, and I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. I'll also clarify that I am not an administrator, I'm just another user like you. Even so, I have to abide by the rules that WikiProject Medicine have laid out.
You must understand that information cannot be added to our Wikipedia articles if it constitutes original research, i.e. research which has not yet been peer-reviewed through a source we consider reliable such as medical journals. If you can find such a source, you are welcome, in my opinion, to add the treatment to the article and state that it is experimental and that it is controversial. So far, this treatment has recieved little medical consensus and therefore the public should not be informed that is it a treatment option.
Please review the following topics and you may understand why we cannot include the information yet:
Many thanks, feel free to contact me again— CycloneNimrod T@lk? 12:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
You have been warned repeatedly by several individuals not to add information on arteriovenous switching to stroke. You have apparently ignored those warnings. Please review guidelines on medically reliable sources before adding the information yet again. Patents and patent applications are not suitable sources for medical articles on wikipedia. If the technology is tested and reported in a peer-reviewed journal, which would be considered a medically reliable sources, then it is suitable for inclusion on the stroke page. Until then, it is undue weight to keep inserting information on a device that is prospective and has not been tested or reported in a peer-reviewed journal. Currently the information amounts to little more than spamming and advertisement for the patents and repeated insertion of the information can result in a blocking of your account and the revocation of your editing privileges. If you are looking for a means to insert the information, I suggest you bring it up at the medicine wikiproject rather than repeatedly inserting the information against WP:CONSENSUS. This is a third-level warning, one more warning will result in your account being reported at the vandalism noticeboard and hence a block. WLU ( talk) 15:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Soomeh ( talk) 11:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I read my talkpage. You emailed me not just once but three times. You have left rude messages on the pages of other editors who have taken the trouble of explaining to you why your additions to stroke, while possibly of future interest, were not presently suitable for inclusion. Whether you're a board-certified MD or not, you cannot claim space on Wikipedia, especially when you are unwilling to collaborate on the most basic level.
Things will change when phase III studies on your technique have been conducted. Once that is the case, you are by all means free to suggest its inclusion on Talk:Stroke, where people without a conflict of interest will proceed to judge it on its merits. You can reply to my message here, or leave a rejoinder on my talkpage, but stop emailing me unless the matter is personal or sensitive. Thank you. JFW | T@lk 20:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
You have been doing some serious misquoting on all of our behalves ( Cyclonenim, JFW etc) and using some straw man arguments. I don't think you fully understand our position.
We have no issue with the treatment, I fully support the experimental treatment (i.e. not yet in Phase III trials, not yet verified by peers (i.e. consensus) etc); however, it is simply experimental. Compare your treatment to warfarin therapy or neurosurgical investigations in haemorrhagic stroke—is your's as well documented as these? Do other physicians know of your treatment as much as they know of these therapies? If not, it's unlikely that it's undergone the necessary validation and verification that treatments need before being recommended to patients.
This is the last I will say on the matter, we have explained to you in simple terms why you cannot add this information yet. It may be suitable for inclusion at a later date when trials have advanced and studies are more numerous and reliable. Consensus has not been achieved with the current studies, however the consensus here at Wikipedia is that this information is not suitable for inclusion. Please do not contact me again until you have resolved our concerns. — Cyclonenim T@lk? 14:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)