User talk:CFCF

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

For an archive of earlier talk (pre 2013) see Archive.

and for archive of talk from 2013 see Archive 2.

Anatomical terms of muscle[edit]

Hi CFCF! As an experiment, I created this: User:LT910001/sandbox/Anatomical terms describing muscle. This really doesn't look that bad, and I am considering moving it to mainspace. Would be grateful if you could give a short checkover and/or add or edit any relevant information, before I make the move. As with anatomical terminology, I think it's much better to have all the information in one article, rather than in a disparate set of several articles that are inherently quite limited in scope. Kindly, --LT910001 (talk) 11:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

At first I just saw the name of the article in your sandbox, but then I saw the link to anatomical terms of muscle which is good. I think this would be a brilliant idea. The article would of course need to be expanded and have images added, and I can unfortunately not help yet (very busy). As soon as I have time (after January 11) I'll get cracking. CFCF (talk) 07:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

There's a better way to rename or move an article[edit]

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Lucida a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Lucida (font). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you.

January 2014[edit]

Information icon Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Space nursing. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 12:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

There was no discussion or improvement for nearly two years. The article as it is is not beyond stub level, and there is no reason why it shoud constitute an individual article. CFCF (talk) 13:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Rosetta Barnstar Hires.png The Rosetta Barnstar
Thanks for adding translations and being involved with the project.[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 01:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


Hi CFCF! Thanks for your many assessments of Anatomy articles. I notice that you're tagging many articles with WPMED and WPANATOMY alike. So that you know, about 5-6 months ago I went through all articles tagged under both WPANATOMY and WPMED, and removed upwards of 900 purely anatomical articles (muscles, nerves, ...) that had been concurrently tagged.

From the WPMED perspective, the reason for removing anatomy articles from WPMED is to make the project leaner: as the Anatomy articles were significantly polluting the assessment and cleanup statistics, and make any effort to cleanup the project (eg the proposed assessment drive; education propositions from universities; uses of any tags in the project) weightier by about 1500 articles.

From the Anatomy perspective, we have a unique group of articles, and if there is some automated process to sift through medical articles (eg applying the disclaimer tag, as proposed) it would also have affected our articles. Additionally, I don't think there is any 'benefit' to having them under WPMED, as when editing discussion will often get routed to WPANATOMY, as WPMED editors are generally more interested in clinical medicine. Statements on clinical medicine are still covered by MEDRS, so there are no worries on that front, although sections of any significant length should probably be moved to the respective clinical articles. \

So! I hope I've made a solid case why most Anatomy articles shouldn't be concurrently tagged =P. If at a later date we are folded back in to WPMED, then an automated process could do much of the tagging.--LT910001 (talk) 02:25, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I discussed the same matter with Doc James and I'll keep this in mind. The articles I added were those with significant clinical information, but I will keep from adding more in the future. CFCF (talk) 09:57, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Image rights query[edit]

This lovely image would look great as the lead image in toothache imo, and would be better than the current image. As the book dates to 1897, can I just upload this to WIkipedia? Lesion (talk) 12:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

American law makes any copy of an image in the public domain non-copyrightable. The only requirement is that no "creative" content has been added to the image, i.e. a scan is not copyrighted. On the other hand I can't find the image in the link they provided. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 13:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Linking to [2] should be enough I think, otherwise ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 13:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I will upload. Lesion (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, CFCF. You have new messages at WP:MCQ.
Message added 11:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ww2censor (talk) 11:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Cropping two images[edit]

Hi CFCF! I was wondering if you could help me out with two images. I'm preparing two sidebars, to be used on our lists and anatomical terminology articles, and I want to have a thematic picture attached. I've prepared the pictures, but they're very large. I was wondering if you could crop them to a 225x90 or 200x90 or a size that you think is more appropriate, and reupload them as new images? The two sidebars I am preparing are here:

If you have a look you'll see how big the images are! --LT910001 (talk) 02:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

One more request. If you could do the same, I will convert the cranial nerve navigation box to a sidebar. I think this image is a good fit: Skull brain human normal.svg. --LT910001 (talk) 03:28, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't know the details, but if you don't want the images in a different ratio your best bet is just to limit the size. Especially the svg file, which is optimized so that it can be displayed at many resolutions. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 07:35, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, that's a better suggestion. --LT910001 (talk) 08:40, 17 February 2014 (UTC)


Will help out in any way I can, but will wait a few days while you set up the infrastructure and flesh it out, so as not to steal your thunder. The project template is here: Template:WikiProject Physiology and the data used for the 'rater' assessment tool is here: Template:WikiProject_Anatomy/rater-data.js, although I'm not sure where to edit so that 'Physiology' is included in the list of selectable projects. At any rate, if you type it in the rater box you can now assess articles. I wish you all the best in this endeavour, --LT910001 (talk) 14:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm looking for it being a long-term project. I'm currently rather busy until next week, but I'll work on it as I find time. Also really want to roll out Cranial nerve soon. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 14:20, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cranial nerve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dogfish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)


I am bringing this matter to your talk page to avoid derailing the main discussion. A translation of the linked document certainly does not support your assertion.

The procedure of cytological aspiration of superficial masses (such as breast masses) is relatively minor, indeed often entrusted to students. I accept that cytologists might be called to undertake this.

The diagnosis of lung cancer from such a procedure is exceedingly rare, if ever. The only suitable cases would be those with superficial lymphadenopathy (cervical or axillary). However the loss of architecture makes the diagnosis of primary lung cancer much more difficult, if not impossible. A core biopsy of such masses is required, and I do not believe that cytologists would be entrusted to do this.

Moreover, I see no reason why cytologists (rather than the referring physician) should be informing patients of the diagnosis of lung cancer. In the case of lung cancer investigation, this is almost always a pulmonologist. Axl ¤ [Talk] 01:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Cytological aspiration is done quite often at the university hospital where I am, at least enough that there are dedicated cytologists to perform procedure and analyze the samples. And while smaller aspirations are minor, many biopsies are somewhere in-between where the patient has to go to the cytology clinic.
As for the other two claims, I think we've misunderstood each other and I agree with you, but cytologists do speak to patients here, while lung cancer most likely was a bad example.CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 08:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I accept that. Best wishes. Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lacer (digambiguation)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Lacer (digambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
  • disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PamD 14:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lacer (digambiguation)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Lacer (digambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is already a redirect from the correct spelling Lacer (disambiguation) to the dab page at lacerum: this misspelled page is redundant.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PamD 14:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

It isn't misspelled, rather its an alternate form, though it may be good to merge the pages as they do not have the same content.CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 14:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I have deleted the page at Lacer (digambiguation). First, there was nothing on that page that was not already on the lacerum disambiguation page, so there was nothing to merge. Second, the misspelling is "digambiguation". As PamD pointed out, there already is a redirect from the correct spelling at Lacer (disambiguation) to the disambiguation page. olderwiser 15:00, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Bkonrad Oh, missed that typo, but there most assuredly was content that has been lost now, for example the categorization of the pages. I suggest you give access to the content so that it can be merged. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 15:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
There were no categories on the deleted page other than Category:Disambiguation pages. Each and every entry on the page has a corresponding entry on the disambiguation page. olderwiser 15:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
The links were categorized after; anatomy and medicine, biology etc. No WP:CATs though. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 15:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I see. The page was as far as I can tell an exact duplicate of the page you originally created at Lacer (disambiguation), which is now located at Lacerum. You can attempt to recover whatever you like from the edit history of that page. olderwiser 15:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Cranial nerve[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Cranial nerve at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

  • CFCF, there is a new review of the article, and a bit more work that needs to be done, but it doesn't look particularly onerous. Please stop by when you can. I'm sorry I let this one lapse. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:36, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hypoglossal nerve, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bilateral and Posterior fossa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


CFCF, WP:WTF redirects to Wikipedia:WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG! which is summarized as "avoid cryptic language" [in editor-to-editor communications]. There is no jargon in the sentence you are deleting and it doesn't seem to apply to the redirected article in any case. As part of your deletion, you are removing citations and leaving the article marked "need citation". Could you please clarify your intentions with respect to the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbi6 (talkcontribs) 17:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I linked to the wrong policy page. Looking for the proper one. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 17:13, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
WP:WTW & WP:N, where what I meant, in case you don't agree with those we can take it up on the talk-page.CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 17:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll review the wording of the deleted statement and the citations with respect to those pages, and respond on the talk page. Barbi6 (talk) 17:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG To give you some sustenance whilst editing cranial nerves. Keep it up! LT910001 (talk) 12:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Reversion of edits[edit]

Hi. I'm the one who added the line in the drug-resistance page. I'm not very familiar with the tags used for changes. I'd given the references for the edit. Is it lack of references that you meant as 'unsourced' edits?

Just wanted to clarify. Thanks in advance.


MauriceMauricesdevaraj (talk) 12:28, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Anatomical terms of bone[edit]

There is one little red link... hopefully soon to turn blue :D. Am going to roll-out User:LT910001/sandbox/Anatomical terms describing bone soon, with a similar process to last time (ie moving most articles to lists). Would you have time to help in a similar way to last time? (ie rapidly wikifying, proposing merges, etc.) Kind regards, --LT910001 (talk) 06:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll do what I can, I might have a little less time these coming days though. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 07:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Optic nerve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vision (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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, (talk) 08:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, CFCF. You have new messages at WP:MCQ.
Message added 10:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ww2censor (talk) 10:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

expansion of plot summary vs. WP: VERIFY for B:TS[edit]

User:CFCF, while I can applaud your efforts to protect the plot summary of this article from "vandalism," I feel like the standard that you are expecting for verification of plot details is unreasonable. The citation that you are referring to <7> for undoing my summary edits contains no details of the game plot apart from a 3 sentence blurb, and has more information about development staff. Citations as applicable to plot summaries are more prominently by group consensus or by in-game dialogue extractions, citations I am happy to provide, but am unable to do in a single editing session.Brinlong (talk) 21:35, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Cranial nerve[edit]

CFCF, can you please stop by and let us know your plans for responding to Orlady's comment on what's needed for the nomination to be approved? I realize you also have a good article review ongoing, but it would be helpful to hear from you. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:55, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Anatomy quarterly newsletter[edit]

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#2)

Previous edition
Released: First quarter, 2014
Editor: LT910001

Hello WP:ANATOMY participant! This is the second quarterly update of goings-on in WP:ANATOMY, documenting the current state of WP:ANATOMY, current projects and items of interest, and any relevant news. 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
What's going on
How can I contribute?
  • Reword anatomical jargon: jargon is widespread and not helpful to lay readers.
  • Contribute on our talk page
  • Continue to add sources, content, and improve anatomical articles!
  • Replace images with better images from Wikipedia commons, or if there are too many images, remove some low-quality ones
Quarterly focus - Where to edit?
One of our two new featured images! (Also featured on the Signpost)

On any given week we have at least 4-10 editors making significant contributions to our articles, with probably more than double this making minor edits. As an editor, I am often wondering: with so many articles, where to start? There is so much to be done (as always, on Wikipedia!), and I aim here to provide a comprehensive list of venues within our project. If I've missed any, please let us know on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page.

An editor might edit:

  • By importance. A user can use our assessment table to view articles by their importance and class. The vital articles project provides a list of designated 'Vital articles' for Wikipedia.
  • By popularity. One way to edit is to edit the most popular pages -- the majority of these need help, and editing is sure to bring benefit to many users.
  • By need. There is always cleanup that needs to be done, whether commenting on mergers, adding infoboxes or adding images.
  • By interest. A series of inter-project categories has been developed to help facilitate inter-Wiki and inter-professional collaboration. These categories sort our articles into organs, system, gross anatomy, neuroanatomy, and several other categories. This should offer a buffet of articles for any interested editors! See here for more details.
  • By topic. Wikipedia's anatomical categories may provide impetus, as may editing a suite of related-articles, using a parent article such as ear for direction. A collection of series are slowly being rolled-out, including one for epithelia and for articles about the gastrointestinal wall, which also act as groups of topics. Templates, as documented on our main page, provide a similar categorisation.
  • By demand. Discussions relating to Anatomy are frequent occurrences on the talk pages for WPMED and WP:ANATOMY. Such topics almost always cry out for more editing.
  • By recent changes. One way to choose a destination for editing is to check the recent changes, revert vandalism, integrate/source edits, or generally collaborate in improving articles that are receiving contributions from other editors. This can be found in the external watchlist, or the (recent contributions for Index of Anatomy), a relatively comprehensive on-wiki list.
  • By chance. A user is always welcome to improve articles that they randomly 'bump into' by Wiki-surfing or by having bumped for other reasons into a particular article or topic that needs improvement

Delivered on behalf of WikiProject Anatomy by User:Mdann52, using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank You - Student Projects[edit]

Just wanted to stop by and thank you for helping out students in my class. Several of their topics were a part of the medical domain, so I appreciate you explaining to them the reference requirements. I've made sure to point those out to students as well. Also, thank you for doing so in such a courteous way, students can often be nervous about interacting with others on here. If you think anything needs my immediate attention, don't hesitate to let me know! I appreciate the help! Mpetracca (talk) 20:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm of the impression that there is enormous benefit to be had from student editing, as long as it is done properly. Medical articles are as you say a delicate matter, but I'm glad to help clarify policies etc. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 08:52, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Obgyn bootcamp[edit]

Hi CFCF! Thanks for reaching out to me regarding the obgyn bootcamp course. Our course starts this week and I am excited to start. Any assistance and advice will be appreciated. Happy Sunday!Celesteroyce (talk) 17:10, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Retinohypothalamic Tract[edit]

I appreciate your feedback to my article. I tried to find an image very similar to the one you chose. It is always difficult for me to find pictures that have an acceptable copyright status. Do you have any other suggestions for improvements on this article? Cbruha11 (talk) 03:31, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I went on a scavenger hunt and after quite a bit I found this:
I accidentaly forgot to give it a new name when I uploaded it to Wikipedia, but it should work nonetheless. I found a few images searching google with: melatonin

As for the actual article, maybe something more on the molecular mechanism in the SCN, although that might be covered by other articles already?

-- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 12:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

If you take other free health files from an open access journal, would you consider posting it also at Commons:Open Access File of the Day/Nominations so that I could promote the file? I am especially looking for files used in at least three places in any language. This file I can easily put in three places, and if you want to get into images, perhaps you might be interested in looking at how to post files in multiple places. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Photoreceptor cell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Resolution (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Royal Society images[edit]

Are there any old images you would especially like on Commons from the Royal Society (UK National Academy of Science) library? Can't promise them, but it is certainly worth asking. A lot is digitized and online already. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 16:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The catalogue is slightly overwhelming, but I will definitely take a look. Anything from the 20th century, especially with labels is of great use. Is there any deadline? CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 16:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
The Science Museum in London also donated many images and would like to someday donate more. Generally what such organizations want is for multiple people to make the request and to get in return some evidence that the content is used. It is worth asking when content is useful. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I think many of these images would be great to illustrate different aspects of the history of medicine, but that isn't really my field, which is why I'm focusing on 20th century or later books. I've ordered a copy of cross section Anatomy of the human body, 1911] to scan myself. Any images/books with that kind of high quality labels in a decent scan would be perfect. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 18:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Damn shame I payed far more for a similar book to this one [3]. Mine is water damaged, hope it doesn't compromise the image quality too much, can't affort to buy several of the same book. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 18:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
On the deadline, no, but I am only there until early July, & say in the next 3 weeks would be best. I'm trying to pull togetrher a package of various things. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 18:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Psoriasis Histology Slide[edit]

Hi CFCF, I meant to respond to your question about this a while ago but forgot. I have now responded. We can talk here or on the talk page. Thanks! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pancreas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Uncinate process (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


I've added your name to an ANI complaint about tag teaming on Electronic cigarette.--FergusM1970Let's play Freckles 11:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)