User talk:Kosherfrog: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:00, 14 April 2008 editJfdwolff (talk \| contribs)Administrators81,547 edits →Suggestion: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 13:48, 15 April 2008 edit undoKosherfrog (talk \| contribs)144 edits →Suggestion Next edit →
Line 75:		Line 75:

	On ] you effectively threatened to "write some really interesting articles in other venues the mentality of the medical editors of Misplaced Pages". I think most comments that were made were ultimately constructive, and I therefore hope you'll have the decency to retract that threat as soon as possible. ] \| ] 22:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)		On ] you effectively threatened to "write some really interesting articles in other venues the mentality of the medical editors of Misplaced Pages". I think most comments that were made were ultimately constructive, and I therefore hope you'll have the decency to retract that threat as soon as possible. ] \| ] 22:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

			*I do not threaten. I tell what I am doing. After the exchanges that have taken place on ] I am convinced that unfortunately wikipedia, when it comes to medical information is DEFINITELY not the place where people in need for instant information regarding a rare condition should go to, as a refernce point. Your personal comments are public and will be given the publicity they deserve, because in your role as the 123rd most active editor you have a special responsibility and ability to model what the medical content in wikipedia is. You absolutely have the right to think that online medical communities are not to your liking and are not providing valuable services but I have equal rights to defend, on the internet, a new medical model where educated patients, in part through high quality exchanges via pee-to-peer patient online communities are improving the quality of care they receive and eventually improving the scientific knowledge of their disease. By blocking any mention of this very important use of the internet you are doing, IMO, a great disservice. I know you think the comments made were constructive, but in my experience, as a group, the editors on ] have demonstrated a close-mindedness about patient-run medical online communities of a kind I haven't witnessed in the medical world for a few years. And I intend to make sure that people know about it. ] (]) 13:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:48, 15 April 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Kosherfrog, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Rklawton 15:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Helpme request

What do you need help with? Pleace replace the {{helpme}} and a few sentences describing your problem and question on this page. --ais523 15:51, 29 November 2006 (U T C)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Pseudocyst; Medical history; Pharmacy practice; Crush syndrome; Pain disorder; Excretory system; Myeloproliferative disease; Patella; Asymptomatic; Liposarcoma; Patient Self-Determination Act; Wit (play); Busulfan; Triceps brachii muscle; Hemiballismus; Chondroma; Premalignant condition; Rhabdomyoma; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society

Cleanup: Germ cell ovarian cancer; Janus kinase; Artificial respiration
Merge: Uremia; Malpractice; Computed tomography
Add Sources: Lymphoma; Glioma; Designated patient
Wikify: Fanconi anemia; Periosteal reaction; Synovial sarcoma
Expand: Erythropoiesis; Terminal illness; Pulmonary artery catheter

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

April 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Participatory Medicine has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Loren.wilton (talk) 07:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion

On WT:MEDMOS you effectively threatened to "write some really interesting articles in other venues the mentality of the medical editors of Misplaced Pages". I think most comments that were made were ultimately constructive, and I therefore hope you'll have the decency to retract that threat as soon as possible. JFW | T@lk 22:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not threaten. I tell what I am doing. After the exchanges that have taken place on WT:MEDMOS I am convinced that unfortunately wikipedia, when it comes to medical information is DEFINITELY not the place where people in need for instant information regarding a rare condition should go to, as a refernce point. Your personal comments are public and will be given the publicity they deserve, because in your role as the 123rd most active editor you have a special responsibility and ability to model what the medical content in wikipedia is. You absolutely have the right to think that online medical communities are not to your liking and are not providing valuable services but I have equal rights to defend, on the internet, a new medical model where educated patients, in part through high quality exchanges via pee-to-peer patient online communities are improving the quality of care they receive and eventually improving the scientific knowledge of their disease. By blocking any mention of this very important use of the internet you are doing, IMO, a great disservice. I know you think the comments made were constructive, but in my experience, as a group, the editors on WT:MEDMOS have demonstrated a close-mindedness about patient-run medical online communities of a kind I haven't witnessed in the medical world for a few years. And I intend to make sure that people know about it. Kosherfrog (talk) 13:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:00, 14 April 2008 editJfdwolff (talk \| contribs)Administrators81,547 edits →Suggestion: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 13:48, 15 April 2008 edit undoKosherfrog (talk \| contribs)144 edits →Suggestion Next edit →
Line 75:		Line 75:

	On ] you effectively threatened to "write some really interesting articles in other venues the mentality of the medical editors of Misplaced Pages". I think most comments that were made were ultimately constructive, and I therefore hope you'll have the decency to retract that threat as soon as possible. ] \| ] 22:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)		On ] you effectively threatened to "write some really interesting articles in other venues the mentality of the medical editors of Misplaced Pages". I think most comments that were made were ultimately constructive, and I therefore hope you'll have the decency to retract that threat as soon as possible. ] \| ] 22:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

			*I do not threaten. I tell what I am doing. After the exchanges that have taken place on ] I am convinced that unfortunately wikipedia, when it comes to medical information is DEFINITELY not the place where people in need for instant information regarding a rare condition should go to, as a refernce point. Your personal comments are public and will be given the publicity they deserve, because in your role as the 123rd most active editor you have a special responsibility and ability to model what the medical content in wikipedia is. You absolutely have the right to think that online medical communities are not to your liking and are not providing valuable services but I have equal rights to defend, on the internet, a new medical model where educated patients, in part through high quality exchanges via pee-to-peer patient online communities are improving the quality of care they receive and eventually improving the scientific knowledge of their disease. By blocking any mention of this very important use of the internet you are doing, IMO, a great disservice. I know you think the comments made were constructive, but in my experience, as a group, the editors on ] have demonstrated a close-mindedness about patient-run medical online communities of a kind I haven't witnessed in the medical world for a few years. And I intend to make sure that people know about it. ] (]) 13:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)