User talk:CFCF/Archive 4

Hi Books & Bytes recipients: The Wikipedia Library has been expanding rapidly and we need some help! We currently have 10 signups for free account access open and several more in the works... In order to help with those signups, distribute access codes, and manage accounts we'll need 2-3 more Account Coordinators.

It takes about an hour to get up and running and then only takes a couple hours per week, flexible depending upon your schedule and routine. If you're interested in helping out, please drop a note in the next week at my talk page or shoot me an email at: jorlowitzgmail.com. Thanks and cheers, Jake Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CFCF, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and ƬheStrikeΣagle 05:36, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...has been bestowed upon your account. Don't hesitate to ask if you have any questions, but it's a relatively straightforward thing. Good luck and thanks for your help, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:03, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Sex differences in intelligence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to General intelligence

Sex differences in psychology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to General intelligence

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning your suppression. To your knowledge follow this link. Thanks. --AlvoMaia (talk) 15:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See here. MoiraMoira (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My god re we a third world country needing this this is rather arrogant, assuming we did ask for a duplicate article despite all the conversations and promises made earlier I now see. Now matters become clear to me. Sorry for sounding irritated but please respect our community and do not place duplicate article on nl-wiki without any explanation. MoiraMoira (talk) 15:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've appreciated your recent efforts in updating Sex differences in psychology. I had been busy reading research sources and updating other articles, so I wasn't able to join in on the work there. As I check the article edit history and the article talk page there to see what work still needs to be done, I look at your talk page and the other most active editor's talk page to discover a a dismaying notice to the other editor and an active discussion of a topic ban for that editor. You may desire to comment on that. On my part, I regret that we are having trouble establishing a collaborative atmosphere for using the best reliable secondary sources for updating that article and other articles on related topics, which are very important. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 14:09, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It feels as if most of what needs saying has been said, but thanks for informing me of the discussion. I haven't really had the time to put myself into the article as much as I would like. There are so many things that could use improvement. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

		The Medicine Barnstar
		To CFCF, thank you for your contributions to WikiProject Medicine. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I notice that you have HighBeam access and you seem to have a few topicons. That being said, if you are interested, I've created {{Wikipedia:HighBeam/Topicon}}. No reply to this message is necessary (and I won't see it unless you ping me), just wanted to let you know it was available. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 00:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have quite extensive access through my library, but unfortunately not through Highbeam, even though it might seem like it. Thanks for the tip though, I might get some other topicons showing what access I have instead. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 06:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can't log in into the ProZ website. I forgot how to get in there. Do you know how? Thank you ̴̴̴̃Mimihitam (talk) 09:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The passwords etc. can be found here. We've restructured the page slightly, and they might not have been so easy to find. I'll fix this. Thanks, -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Silly me, no link: Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Translation task force/Adding content. There we go, Mimihitam -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Why did you remove this without saying anything? I wasn't informed on my talk page or anything? CFCF (mesaj) 09:17, 15 Temmuz 2014 (UTC)

I saw you moved it here [2], and translated it. Thank you, -- CFCF (mesaj) 09:18, 15 Temmuz 2014 (UTC)

Offers does ​​announcements about mostly new projects, on the page. I moved your message to attention page. Because news, announcements are made that . I think you are worried to see that deleted. I also thank you for the announcement. Uğurkent (talk) 10:05, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

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

sign up for monthly delivery

This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice.

note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine

Spotlight - Simplified article translation

---

Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.

Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:

• WHO's list of Essential Medicines[3]
• Neglected tropical diseases[4]
• Key diseases for medical subspecialties like: oncology, emergency medicine (list), anatomy, internal medicine, surgery, etc.

We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.

What's happening?

---

IEG grant

I've (CFCF) taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.

Wikimania 2014

For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.

Integration progress

There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish.
What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.

• Swedish
  Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that.
  Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
• Dutch
  Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
• Polish
  Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article.
  (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
• Arabic
  The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.

Integration guides

Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.

Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here [5]

News in short

---

To come

• Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
• Proofreading drives

Further reading

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

Medical Translation partners Translators Without Borders WikiProject Medicine (English) Wiki Project Med Foundation resources Progress (full) Progress (simplified) Babylon Integration guides Wikipedia - Translate outreach Editor Outreach Journal outreach get involved Sign up

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

Hi, thanks for the offer. Sure, I will be happy to take the role of leading integrator in Arabic Wikipedia.--Ffraih (talk) 08:16, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CFCF!

Regarding your message on pt.wiki Village Pump, we are returning with activities on local WikiProject. There are a few participants and a few more inactive participants. We use a list to send messages in mass for those who are listed as participants of the project. I can send that message to them if you believe that is a good idea. Cheers.—Teles «Talk to me˱_{M @ C S}˲» 21:34, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great, just remember to ping me on the pt.wikipedia so that I can see the discussion (I have e-mail alerts so if you just

[[User:CFCF]]

I will get your message. Thanks! -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Message was sent to participants using MassMessage. Regards.—Teles «Talk to me˱_{M @ C S}˲» 00:05, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, wonderful! -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 11:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFCF,

thank you for the message about multiple sclerosis article integration on Croatian Wikipedia. Yes, I already have the Croatian translation of the en.wiki article saved on my PC, but I'm trying to figure out how to merge the two articles. The Croatian article is already well done, but the translation is even better. I will try to work on this in the weekend, when I have more free time. Once done, I will update the Translation task force/RTT page and leave you a message. Best regards.--Dean72 (talk) 23:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, thanks a bunch. It's been out a while, I think we will commission a bot in the future to inform of finished translations immediately when they are done. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF, many thanks for the star! Iztwoz (talk) 07:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry, I will not do it. Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is no problem. Just thought you might be interested. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 08:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello, I don't know if you're aware of it but you are adding content to some articles in Turkish wikipedia without integrating them to already existing material. Articles are now in a mess. Will you do something to correct it? --Mskyrider (talk) 14:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've previously informed the community, and will do so again shortly, but the old articles were very short and lacked sources. The alternatives are to replace the old article and take the translation only, or to merge them. It is simple to move the old articles to the talk-page if you think that is preferable? -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 14:24, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any suggestion where I might find editors willing to help out? -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 14:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I vaguely remember having a message about this on our village pump. I don't feel very comfortable having to suppress the old content but it is a good-sized job to merge them with the existent content. The translation seems "almost" ok, but I think the translators didn't really look up the internal links. Medical terms could be a little bit different with the article names existent. As nobody came to your "appel" before, I'm sceptic, but if you leave another message to village pump, I could try to translate it to appeal users to help out with those articles. As the material is a bit technical, I hope we could find some volunteers. No need to transfer the old content to talk page as they are already available in history. --Mskyrider (talk) 14:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • And thank you ! --Mskyrider (talk) 14:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I will make an announcement on the village pump tomorrow. I previously posted at [6], which didn't give any responses. As you say, the translations are technical in content, which may be why people are hesitant to help out. The texts should be correct, as they are checked by medical doctors before being translated, and are translated by professional translators. I will prepare a text and run it by you before placing it on the village pump! -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 14:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I have translated your message and put it here to our Village pump. At the same page you can ask some volunteers as well. Hope that there will be some willing. Keep up the good work. --Mskyrider (talk) 09:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tuberculosis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stigma. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Notable cases of locked in syndrome, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sean Kenney. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cranial nerves you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seppi333 -- Seppi333 (talk) 23:20, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Just a reminder: when you split an article like Locked-in syndrome, could you please make a point of providing attribution for the work of the editors who created the content you're moving, at the very least with an acknowledgement of the source in an edit summary? Thank you! There's advice on this at WP:CWW; {{copied}} and {{split from}}/{{split to}} may be useful. I've fixed this one (I think!). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I should know better - must have missed it. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 08:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cranial nerves you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cranial nerves for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seppi333 -- Seppi333 (talk) 02:22, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF - just to say that I put a reconstruction tag on Heart article per your comment. If this is not wanted please just remove - thanks. And well done for cranial nerves! Iztwoz (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, I'm pretty stumped with work atm, but I have a rough draft, and a number of things left before I go live with it. I didn't remember the link to the construction tab, and when I went to look it up I forgot to about adding it. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 14:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know that I reverted this edit you made on ro.wikipedia in the name of TWB. The reasons are as follows:

1. We don't agree to replace any existing and cited text, especially with a one translated by the TWB.
2. You could have asked for my help to verify the translation and try to integrate it, not throwing it like you did, above the initial text.
3. I don't know who these people from the Romanian TWB are, but they clearly have no medical knowledge whatsoever.
4. All the previous translation attempts made by the TWB are/were of low to middle quality (at best).
5. We don't accept such edits from non-Wikipedia people, as they are not used to ro.wikipedia and also with the way a Romanian medical article should look like.
6. As stated here, in a message to Jmh649 from June 19th, a Romanian medical article should primarily reflect the situation in Romania, especially regarding the treatment and prevention of the disease.
7. We consider that if an article don't have the FA status on en.wikipedia, then it shouldn't be translated.
8. I already found several mistakes in the translation made by the TWB, regarding the reverted edit mentioned at the beginning.

For these reasons as described above, I officially request to stop any further translation attempts on Romanian Wikipedia. Thank you very much for understanding. Kind regards, Winter^eu (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF, thanks for performing this merge. 'Chest' is a popular article (over 7,000 views/month) and I think it might be worth opening the merge to discussion rather than performing it instantly. I support your merge, but I think it is better if other users are allowed to comment on some of the larger mergers first, even if they are pretty straightforward. I hope that you're well, --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was not looking forward to removing the new "Lack of a cerebellum" section[7] and having to explain why the New Scientist isn't an appropriate reference. Thanks for taking care of that. It's amazing how quickly the news<->Wikipedia feedback cycle can get going these days. HorsePunchKid 18:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Translation task force/Integration guides/Translating page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a short note to the Pulse newsletter about the number of anatomy articles passing 10,000, a major milestone which I think is well-worth mentioning. --WS (talk) 18:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you Wouterstomp. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 18:49, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

sign up for monthly delivery

Feature – Ebola articles

During August we have translated Disease and it is now live in more than 60 different languages! To help us focus on African languages Rubric has donated a large number of articles in languages we haven't previously reached–so a shout out them, and Ian Henderson from Rubric who's joined us here at Wikipedia. We're very happy for our continued collaboration with both Rubric and Translators without Borders!

Just some of our over 60 translations:

• Xhosa
• Northern Sotho
• Zulu
• Tsonga
• Venda
• Hausa
• Igbo
• Yoruba
• Kinyarwanda
• Swahili
• Tigrinya

New roles and guides!

At Wikimania there were so many enthusiastic people jumping at the chance to help out the Medical Translation Project, but unfortunately not all of them knew how to get started. That is why we've been spending considerable time writing and improving guides! They are finally live, and you can find them at our home-page!

New sign up page!

We're proud to announce a new sign up page at WP:MTSIGNUP! The old page was getting cluttered and didn't allow you to speficy a role. The new page should be easier to sign up to, and easier to navigate so that we can reach you when you're needed!

Style guides for translations

Translations are of both full articles and shorter articles continues. The process where short articles are chosen for translation hasn't been fully transparent. In the coming months we hope to have a first guide, so that anyone who writes medical or health articles knows how to get their articles to a standard where they can be translated! That's why we're currently working on medical good lede criteria! The idea is to have a similar peer review process to good article nominations, but only for ledes.

Some more stats

• In July, 18 full article translations went live (WP:RTT), and an additional 6 simplified versions went live (WP:RTTS)!
• We have a number of new lead integrators into Dutch, Polish, Arabic and Bulgarian, with more to come in smaller languages! (Find them here old sign up page)
• We were mentioned in a Global Voices Online report by Subhashish Panigrahi at Doctors and translators are working together to bridge Wikipedia's medical language gap
• New medical professionals have started, dedicated to working in Odiya and Kinyarwanda!

Further reading

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

-- CFCF 🍌 (email) 13:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message regarding signup. I am primarily active in Nepal Bhasa wiki but can be found in Hindi and Nepali wiki as well. Please feel free to keep me updated about the project.--Eukesh (talk) 16:55, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depression. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF - had a look at your merge proposal for puborectalis muscle and thought that a better move would be to merge all three levator ani muscles to Levator ani. So I have put merge tags on the others but existing tag prevents merge tag on puborectalis muscle. Also there is no place to discuss your proposed merge on either talk page. So have put it to you here. Would appreciate your thoughts. Iztwoz (talk) 20:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to merge all three articles. While the pubococcygeus and ileococcygeus are traditionally separated (the puborectalis being more of a subdivision to pubococcygeus), they are the same muscle, and it wouldn't be hard to cover all three parts in one article. I think it's far more important that our articles give a broad overview than that each feature has an article. Not to mention that the articles are rediculously short.

I'm all for merging things like Facial canal with Hiatus for greater petrosal nerve & Prominence of facial canal. I might even go far enough to merge them all with Internal acoustic meatus even though they aren't the same thing. I think we need to take this up at WT:ANAT and decide on a general guideline for how large/important features need to be to justify their own articles, and on how we want to display TA/FMA numbers when a page covers several features. It is completely unreasonable that there are so many articles on bone/organ features such as Inferior angle of the scapula, Medial border of scapula, etc. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 07:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can I just draw you attention though to when you add a merge tag - it is incomplete (just seen the proposed thyroid cartilage) - it doesn't generate any link to a talk page for discussion, and there is no reason given for the proposal. Its simple to do this if you enable Twinkle and use the tagging option. Without this option for discussion it might as well be just merged without using a merge tag. thanks Iztwoz (talk) 20:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm commenting on your talk page, CFCF, WT:ANAT seems like a useful place to have a central discussion about this. --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:19, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF, thanks for your work on the recent WPMED newsletters! It's great to be able to keep up to date with what's going on. I'd like to keep releasing a quarterly newsletter for WPANATOMY as I think it's a good way to cover progress. I was wondering if, or how, we might integrate content from WPMED to WPANATOMY newsletter, or visa-versa? I guess one way would be to have everything (like the signpost) in subpages that come up every few editions, eg. an anatomy subpage of the newsletter ever 3 months, a translation subsection ever month, and so on. I thought I'd ask you first, as in my understanding you were the most recent editor, but as our discussion grows I may move it to the newsletter talk page so others can participate.--Tom (LT) (talk) 06:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is definitely a possibility, but it would require the conjoined efforts of multiple editors. I'm not able to take it on fully myself, just due to time constraints. I'll add what I find interesting, but I don't have time to write more than the translation part regularly. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 16:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's a bit much for you to do all as one person. What I may do is release the anatomy quarterly about a week before the end of a quarter. That way you'll have enough time to may a decision what to do with it. --Tom (LT) (talk) 21:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On Aug 28, 2014, you merged the content of human heart into heart without much discussion. While the resulting article is great, I think it should be under human heart in order to make room for a general animal anatomy article under the title heart. This would be in analogy to Human skeleton and Skeleton, Human lungs and Lungs - there are many other examples. --Melody Lavender (talk) 11:06, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Human brain may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Cortical Areas-02.jpg|thumb|right|350px|Locations of two brain areas historically associated with}} language processing, [[Broca's area]] and [[Wernicke's area]], and associated regions of sound
• 05}}</ref><ref>[http://www.medbio.info/Horn/IntMet/integration_of_metabolism%20v4.htm MedBio.info > Integration of Metabolism] Professor em. Robert S. Horn, Oslo, Norway. Retrieved on May 1, 2010. [

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:13, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to CpG site may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• :<math>((number of C + number of G)/length of sequence)/2)^2</math><ref name="Saxonov2006"/>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Did you check whether the merge was performed or not? It is. It really is. It is so merged, it can't be merged any more than that. Could you please tell us why on earth you would want to discuss whether a merge should be performed that was already performed? You must have missed out on something here?--Melody Lavender (talk) 17:00, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am very much aware, as I performed the merge. In lieu of discussion prior to the merge it has popped up afterwards, and it seems there is consensus that it was performed properly (as far as I can tell). It would seem inappropriate to close the discussion and display "no consensus" on the grounds that there had been a revert war, when you were reverted only once and there was apparent consensus. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 17:06, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus. You can perform the other reverts in your head - it's insane to not call it a revert war. Reverting while someone is trying to create a discussion (let's call it that, I mean look at the opening text) is not the decent thing to do, it is disruptive, and people aren't going to participate in that discussion.--Melody Lavender (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

James removed this section as he had no consensus for inclusion. Your vote "I don't understand" adds nothing useful to the discussion and does not change the utter lack of consensus for its inclusion. We don't vote on Wikipedia for a good reason. -- Colin°^Talk 14:18, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not voting is not the same as having the loudest, most enduring, rambling voice win either. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 15:35, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I won't insult you with an edit war template. But that is what you are doing. The RFC is not closed. The person who opened it, James, removed that text because he addmited he had no consensus to add it. Quite why you think you should edit war to put it back, is beyond me. And if you read my discussion of the text, you might appreciate how shite it is. But, you know, if you want to be blocked for reinserting shite, be my guest. -- Colin°^Talk 15:47, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you realise that the text you are edit warring to include is not actually the subject of the RFC that you unhelpfully voted in and rashly thought had reached a consensus? You see that text is just adding more dire prose to the existing Mechanism section; it isn't the entire section. That text is being discussed in "Propose added to mechanisms the following" which is a section created by James at the same time as he removed his text that you are adding back. And that second discussion has absolutely zero support for the text. Because, as I said, it is dire. You could redeem yourself by reverting your own mistake. And even if the text you were edit warring over was being discussed by the RFC, the RFC is not closed and we never presume the outcome while it is being discussed. So, even if you weren't making a mistake, you'd be wrong. -- Colin°^Talk 17:19, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CFCF. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thanks for your editing on the inferior hypogastric plexus article! The reason why I contact you is because you removed the prostate, but on the prostate article it says that its primary nerve is the inferior hypogastric plexus. I don't know whether it's a mistake or not.

Royerlraph79 (talk) 10:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Royerlraph79 First of all you need to differentiate between innervation and course, which aren't necessarily related. Secondly, we can't reference Wikipedia articles, but need to reference proper medical sources: see WP:MEDRS and WP:Circular. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 10:47, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and how can I add sources? And I don't understand the innervation and course thing, though… a sensory nerve goes to an organ to innervate it, right? And the course is when it travels from a place to another, uh? Royerlraph79 (talk) 00:42, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, while in essence correct it isn't that simple, and is further complicated by the fact that these are plexa, not nerves. I would really recommend Marieb's book, or the CNX A&P [8] -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 08:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for citing I normally use the citation gadget, or even better ProveIt gadget (can be turned on under preferences). -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 08:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plexuses can be nerves or vessels, so what's wrong? Sorry, I do not unerstand… Royerlraph79 (talk) 13:24, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nerves may arise from plexuses, but that does not mean the plexus follow the nerve, you don't say the brachial plexus is present in the hand just because it has branches there. You're going to need to read up on basic anatomy if you wish to contribute. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 15:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's even more complicated because hypogastric isn't the preferred modern terminology, and all those articles should be deleted or moved/merged. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 15:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia articles incorporating text CNX Anatomy & Physiology, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 06:21, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF, I heard WMF has some fancy translation tools for side by side translation available? I was thinking about doing some reverse translation into English from some of the other wikis, and was wondering whether these are available and how one might use them? --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:19, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure they're completed, but they are supposed to be accessible through some power-user commands. I'm not so sure about much else, but you can see the team developing them here [9]. I'm currently in Japan, so won't be so active for a few weeks, but I will look it up when I get back. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 10:24, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help, CFCF-san. Enjoy your time in Japan! --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:42, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#3)

Previous -- Next

Released: 1 November, 2014

Editor: Tom (LT)

Hello WP:Anatomy participant! This is the third quarterly update, documenting what's going on in WikiProkect Anatomy, news, current projects and other items of interest. I'd greatly value feedback on this, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talkpage or remove your name from the mailing list

What's new

• Several new GAs: Cervix, Cranial nerves, Parathyroid gland, Sebaceous glands, Pudendal nerve
• New FL (Anatomical terms of motion)
• Finally, an automatically-generated list of articles needing cleanup is available: [10]
• A list of recent changes is created, and can also be attached as a template for user pages: {{Recent changes in Anatomy}}
• Reached GA goal of 10 articles! -- now increased to 20
• We were Featured in the signpost!
• An essay about the use of Anatomical terminology, WP:ANATSIMPLIFY is released (see below for more!)

What's going on

• We fly past 10,000 articles (now already up to 10,150). Why is this important? Articles under our scope are automatically included in popular pages, the cleanup list, and will be included as the recent changes list is updated.
• A discussion about the formatting of infoboxes.
• A lot of editing on the heart article -- can it make it to GA?
• The medical newsletter, WP:PULSE finds its feet, and Anatomy and Physiology are featured as a subsection!
• A new WP:WikiProject Animal anatomy (WP:ANAN) is created to focus on animal anatomy.

How can I contribute?

• Welcome new editors! We have a constant stream of new editors who are often eager to work on certain articles.
• We are always looking to collaborate! If you're looking for editors to collaborate with, let us know on our talk page!
• Continue to add high-class reliable sources
• Browse images on WikiCommons to improve the quality of images we use on many articles.

Quarterly focus - Anatomical terminology

Anatomical terminology is an essential component to all our articles. It is necessary to describe structures accurately and without ambiguity. It can also be extremely confusing and, let's face it, it's likely you too were confused too before you knew what was going on ("It's all Greek to me!" you may have said, fairly accurately).

In the opinion of this editor, it's very important that we try hard to describe anatomy in a way that is both technically accurate and accessible. The majority of our readers are lay readers and will not be fluent in terminology. Anatomy is a thoroughly interesting discipline, but it shouldn't be 'locked away' only to those who are fluent in the lingo – exploring anatomy should not be limited by education, technical-level English fluency, or unfamiliarity with its jargon. Anatomical terminology is one barrier to anatomical literacy.

Here are four ways that we can help improve the readability of our anatomical articles.

1. Substitute. Use words readers are familiar with -- there is no need to use anatomical terminology unless necessary!

   Innervated by

   The nerve that supplies X is...

2. Explain. When using terminology, remember readers will likely not understand what you mean, so consider adding an explanation and providing context. Use wikilinks for terms that a reader may not know.

   "The triceps extends the arm" may not be readily understood. A small addition may help the reader:

   "The triceps extends the arm, straightening it". Consider:

3. Separate. Do not use long, complicated sentences. Don't write discursive, long comparisons unless needed. Start with simple information first, then get progressively more complex. Separate information by paragraph and subsection. Bite-sized information is much more easier to digest for readers who don't have a solid anatomical foundation
4. Eliminate. Not all information is necessary on every article. Hatnotes are a simple and effective way to direct readers to another article. Don't provide long lists of synonyms of names for structures that an article isn't about. If a sentence has been paraphrased to the hilt, consider that several editors are indicating it may need to be simplified.

   "The other branches of the trigeminal nerve are the opthalmic nerve (nervus opthalmicus) and mandibular nerve (nervus mandibularis)"

   "The other branches of the trigeminal nerve are the opthalmic nerve and mandibular nerve" is much more easily digestible

This essay is provided in full on WP:ANATSIMPLIFY.

This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WP:ANATOMY users. To opt-out, leave a message on the talkpage of Tom (LT) or remove your name from the mailing list

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • English signup
  • Deutsch signup
• Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
• Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
• British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
• Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
• Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
• JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

Hi! Just leaving a message to let you know that I find your resources section a great initiative. Keep up the great work! Cheers, --Jelly Bean MD (talk) 00:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, very good to hear someone has found and is using them! There will be more coming in January, and hopefully I will be able to streamline the editing process, it takes a while to crop and cut each image as it is. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 13:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I logged in to TWB and saw some articles translated for more than 4 months (Status "completed"). Can I myself merge them into the Czech Wikipedia articles? Is licensing OK in that case? --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 20:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vojtěch Dostál Yes you may. That would be excellent. All content was originally written on English Wikipedia under a CC BY SA license. All content that results post translation is also under a CC BY SA license.

Please simply acknowledge English Wikipedia and the translators in question in the edit summary. Let me know if you need any help with these steps. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks User:Doc James. Also the translator makes the same mistakes I indicated before. User:CFCF promised to contact me and plan possible workshops for the translators. Please do! :) --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 00:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Email me and I will connect you to the translators. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, missed your post here. Thanks for the e-mail. --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 18:55, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• Elsevier - science and medicine journals and books
• Royal Society of Chemistry - chemistry journals
• Pelican Books - ebook monographs
• Public Catalogue Foundation- art books

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list.

You have reverted Safety of electronic cigarettes 3 times already. One more revert will break the 3RR rule. AlbinoFerret 06:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFCF. Perhaps you already noticed it, toady I realized that the animations[11] which you created but not worked well at that time, are now perfectly working. I suppose some size-restriction settings would be changed. --Was a bee (talk) 05:21, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CFCF. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Hordaland (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit over the top[12], considering that the thread was just commented on within the hour. While i agree that the user may be flogging the horse carcass, he does indeed comment on content and suggests improvements... thus archiving it to silence hir is not ok. --Kim D. Petersen 20:03, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KimDabelsteinPetersen Oh, thanks for reverting it. I was a tad lazy and only looked at the lowest date tags, and there it hadn't been commented since the 31st. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 20:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also I actually increased the archiving to 7 days now that discussion is a bit slower. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 20:52, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Comparative anatomy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Homology. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list and
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! --Wuerzele (talk) 08:07, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You've created a huge inconsistency here and it needs to be reversed. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:03, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Scania, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tomas e (talk) 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, a bit of elaboration outside the template above. Your move of Scania to Skåne has all kinds of problems, irrespective if I agree with the name you have chosen using "Use English" as justification (somewhat surprising for a name with an "å" in it!), and apparently without considering WP:COMMONNAME, as far as I can see. First of all, it is a contentious move that needs to be discussed beforehand (see also WP:RMCM). Second, you have just dumped the current article text (as well as that of its talk page) into its new location, effectively losing all edit history. This is NEVER EVER the way to move an article! Finally, you have moved categories out of procedure, which means that project tags didn't follow. All this needs to be corrected, but to avoid necessary double work, we first need to establish if the consensus says that the article should be under Scania or Skåne. I have therefore not restored the articles or corrected the procedure right now. Instead, I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sweden#Scania has become Skåne. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]