Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Women's Health: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:58, 5 June 2015 editBfpage (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers19,587 edits →Categories: comment← Previous edit Revision as of 21:51, 5 June 2015 edit undoBfpage (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers19,587 edits Article assessments; feel free to review and/or changeNext edit →
Line 240: Line 240:
::The most accurate word defining cancers specific to the reproductive organs, which in my gyne book includes breasts is: "gynecologic oncology", but what a mouthful...there must be something better. ::The most accurate word defining cancers specific to the reproductive organs, which in my gyne book includes breasts is: "gynecologic oncology", but what a mouthful...there must be something better.
:::<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;background:#E6E6FA;border:solid 1px;border-radius:7px;box-shadow:darkgray 0px 3px 3px;">&nbsp;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;]&nbsp;</span> 00:58, 5 June 2015 (UTC) :::<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;background:#E6E6FA;border:solid 1px;border-radius:7px;box-shadow:darkgray 0px 3px 3px;">&nbsp;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;]&nbsp;</span> 00:58, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

==Assessing articles==
I am planning a long string of article assessments and project template placements on articles that I think should be part of the project. Please feel free to double check my editing history to see if there is a problem with any of my assessments. To make it easier for someone from this project to review my assessment, I will leave info in the edit summary so that you won't have to go to the talk page of the article to determine how I assessed it, you will be able to tell how I assessed it by a quick read of the my edit summaries. If there is any disagreement whatsoever, please feel to go to the article talk page and change my assessment, I will take no offense. You don't even have to explain why you changed the assessment. Best Regards,
:<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;background:#E6E6FA;border:solid 1px;border-radius:7px;box-shadow:darkgray 0px 3px 3px;">&nbsp;&nbsp;]&nbsp;&#124;]&nbsp;</span> 21:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:51, 5 June 2015

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Women's Health and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months 

Scope

Thank you for starting this project! One of the first things to do is to define a scope as precisely as possible.

Here are the original categories listed at the project proposal:

In addition, many of the other subcategories of Category:Women's health are probably within the scope of this project:

Categories potentially within the scope of this WikiProject

Several questions arise over the scope. Does this project cover:

  • Legal topics related to women's health?
  • People associated with women's health?
  • Organizations related to women's health?
  • Female anatomy?

Once the categories are nailed down and a template is created, a bot request can be made to add talk page banners to articles. gobonobo 01:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I would say yes, yes, and yes regarding the inclusion of legal topics, people, and organizations. Other opinions? Kaldari (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I agree about including those. Sarah (SV) 02:14, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
We should be careful about categories like Menstrual cycle though, as it includes things not really related to women's health, like Maya moon goddess and Whitten effect. Kaldari (talk) 17:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Industry funding and ghostwriting of sources

In case anyone here would like to comment, I've opened a discussion about the above at Misplaced Pages talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)#Industry funding and ghostwriting of sources, with a view to adding something to the guideline. Sarah (SV) 21:05, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Categories

There are so many other cancers besides breast cancer that have a major impact on women. Just think about it-for every different kind of organ that a woman possesses and a man does not, there is a cancer affiliated with that organ AND its tissues. Since we have the chance to organize the categories right from the start is there a better way or category name that would cover all the cancers specific to women?

  Bfpage |leave a message  00:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
The most accurate word defining cancers specific to the reproductive organs, which in my gyne book includes breasts is: "gynecologic oncology", but what a mouthful...there must be something better.
  Bfpage |leave a message  00:58, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Assessing articles

I am planning a long string of article assessments and project template placements on articles that I think should be part of the project. Please feel free to double check my editing history to see if there is a problem with any of my assessments. To make it easier for someone from this project to review my assessment, I will leave info in the edit summary so that you won't have to go to the talk page of the article to determine how I assessed it, you will be able to tell how I assessed it by a quick read of the my edit summaries. If there is any disagreement whatsoever, please feel to go to the article talk page and change my assessment, I will take no offense. You don't even have to explain why you changed the assessment. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:51, 5 June 2015 (UTC)