User talk:Drsoumyadeepb

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

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Drsoumyadeepb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, try Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then type {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page.

Rod of asclepius.png

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to visit the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).


Again, welcome!  Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 10:09, 22 November 2013 (UTC)]

There is a great tool in the top of the edit box that helps you format references. Instructions are here [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 10:15, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
You are picking up Wikipedia editing fast. Many thanks for joining us. Let me know if you have any questions. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 11:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Automatic invitation to visit WP:Teahouse sent by HostBot[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Drsoumyadeepb! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014[edit]

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors[edit]

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Medical Translation Newsletter[edit]


Medical translation.svg

Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

Stetho book.jpg

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

sign up for monthly delivery


Wiki Project Med Foundation logo.svg
TWB.svg

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:

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
CFCF - "IEG beneficiary" and editor of this newsletter.

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 [4]

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



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 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daasgupta (talkcontribs) 03:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Empty sections[edit]

We do not typically create these. Thus removed the one at cloxacillin. Hope all is well. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Doc James (talk · contribs I noticed it in quite a few pages and hence did on some others too. Will remove them. Thanks for pointing out. But it suprises me that many drugs have information on mechanism of action but no adverse effect section. An empty section mark might help bring focus. What do you think ? Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 06:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
We do definitely want to include sections on side effects. Would be great to go around and start these sections with a small amount of content when they are missing. This is a good easily accessible source. [5] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:19, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

November 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Satyendra Nath Bose 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:
  • rank)|Reader]] of the department of Physics of the recently founded [[University of Dhaka]] (now in [[Bangladesh]]. Bose set up whole new departments, including laboratories, to teach advanced
  • class were [[Srinivasa Ramanujan]], [[Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman]] and [[Megh Nad Saha]].</ref>}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:06, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable new journal. Not indexed in any selective databases (PubMed indexing is through PubMed Central), no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

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. Randykitty (talk) 10:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Randykitty 

Many thanks for your query about the journal. I think it should not be deleted and merits a wikipedia page because It meets criteria of WP:NJournals it is indeed indexed in Pubmed. Please see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Journal+of+family+medicine+and+primary+care If you can click on any article you see that it has a PMID as well as PMCID. I guess one checked the NLM catalog which still says the older status " PubMed: Coverage to be announced " BUt indeed is is coveredin Pubmed as well as Pubmed Central. It also meets the third criteria since it is the first medical journal from India on family medicine and primary care. Please discuss further. Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 10:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 10:30, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Randykitty Can you please specify what are the exact points. I addressed the points already and it does meet the WP:NJournals or WP:GNG Telling my points again. I think it should not be deleted and merits a wikipedia page because It meets criteria of WP:NJournals it is indeed indexed in Pubmed. Please see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Journal+of+family+medicine+and+primary+care If you can click on any article you see that it has a PMID as well as PMCID. I guess one checked the NLM catalog which still says the older status " PubMed: Coverage to be announced " BUt indeed is is coveredin Pubmed as well as Pubmed Central. It also meets the third criteria since it is the first medical journal from India on family medicine and primary care. Please discuss further. Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 10:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  • It meets neither NJournals nor GNG. To claim a historic purpose it is not enough to say that it's the first journal to cover xyz. You need independent reliable sources that discuss this. PubMed is not selective. It's enough for a journal to be OA and then it gets included through PubMed Central. MEDLINE or Index medicus are selective parts of PubMed, but this journal is not in those. There's not a single independent source, so this does not come even close to meet GNG. Hope this explains. --Randykitty (talk) 10:39, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Randykitty 1. Please note again that it is IN PUBMED and not just PUBMED CENTRAL. Those journals that are in PMC only do come up in Pubmed searches but they do not get PMID. They get a PMIC ID only. NJournals does not require it to be in MEDLINE. 2. Please see Refernece 2 in the now revised article. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. I hope this is fine.

Deletion issue settled.It stays. Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 11:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  • I'm sorry, but you are misunderstanding our procedures. I understand you're new and they can be daunting then. An AfD notice should not be removed before the AfD debate has been closed after having run for 7 days. This is the place where you should place your arguments, not here, because the issue will be settled there, not here. Please read the linked policies before you do so, as it may make your life a lot easier and your arguments more effective. NJournals indeed does not require MEDLINE indexing, but it also does not accept PubMed alone as a selective database. The reference you added is not independent (as one could already suspect from its breathless enthusiasm). It's the website of an international organization announcing the new journal of one of its member organizations. --Randykitty (talk) 12:53, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Randykitty I think you are just bullying me because I am new in Wikipedia. You did not put up the notice after discussion and neither can you justify that it does not meet NJournals criteria. First you said it is not in Pubmed.. when proved wrong you said not in Medline .. when pointed out is not an essential criteria then you are saying weird things like "does not accept PubMed alone as a selective database" . About history Can you please point out any other journal from South Asia on this. I searched NLM catalog just now and could not find any. One can put up such notices on hundreds of wiki articles and we will then only discuss ! Kindly remove the notice.

Note : The journal is indexed with CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), Hinari, Index Copernicus, Indian Science Abstracts, National Science Library, OpenJGate, PrimoCentral, and Ulrich's International Periodical Directory — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drsoumyadeepb (talkcontribs)

  • I am sorry you feel bullied, that certainly is not the intention. As I said before, WP is pretty daunting in the beginning because there are many policies and guidelines. Article creation is one of the most difficult things here. As for the indexing services you listed, none of them is considered both major and selective. As for PubMed, I don't think I changed my "story", just read again what I actually said. --Randykitty (talk) 13:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Randykitty Please tell me what is considered major and accepted. I will then put up notices like you did on all articles which are not in that index. Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 13:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  • There are many indexes that are considered major and selective. For medical journals, that's for example any Thomson Reuters database (Science Citation Index Expanded, Current Contents, and such), MEDLINE, Scopus, or, to a lesser extent CINAHL. ProQuest and EBSCO databases are not regarded as very selective. Apart from that, there are probably indeed articles on journals that should be deleted. It is certainly possible (even rather certain) that, hopefully, a small percentage of WP's articles do not meet our inclusion criteria. Of course, that could still be a large number, given that WP has over 4.5 million articles. Arguing that something should be kept because other similar articles exists is therefore not a strong argument (we call that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS or, less reverently WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS). One last remark: please don't confuse "notability" in the sense that WP uses it with anything like "worthy" or "deserving" or the like. Whether or not a journal gets an article is not decided based on its quality or lack thereof, but solely on the basis of whether it has been "noted". Indeed, we have articles on some journals because they are of such low quality that reliable sources have reported about this (needless to say, such journals are almost never listed in any reputable database). Hope this explains things a bit. --Randykitty (talk) 13:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Randykitty

and where is this list given in WIki policy ? And please note " Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines".Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 14:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
You are right that NJournals is only an essay, not a guideline or policy. NJournals was designed to make it easier for journals to get into WP. If you reject NJournals, then the remaining guideline is WP:GNG, which for the great majority of journals is almost impossible to satisfy. --Randykitty (talk) 14:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

that is what I am saying Randykitty you are just bullying around because you are a admin based on weird essays which do not make any sense and are not a guideline or policy. I do not see why PubMed should be excluded from the list of reliable indexing . I will refrain from any further editing unless such vandalism by you is stopped. Try developing sensible policies instead of shouting on flawed and vague essays . Drsoumyadeepb (talk) 15:07, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

  • What you don't seem to realize is that by invoking NJournals, I was trying it to make easier for you to show this journal's notability. I'm perfectly fine if you want to ignore NJournals. To keep the article, you will then have to show that it meets WP:GNG, which, as I said, is almost impossible for an academic journal. I am not bullying you, nor have I at any point mentioned the fact that I am an admin, which is a purely technical position and does nto give me any more "power" in a debate like this than you. This is not an admin thing and I am not using my admin tools in any way here. Please stop these baseless accusations and try to familiarize yourself with how things get done here. If you take a look at the AfD debate, you'll see that several editors actually agree with my position (although it is still early and other people with different opinions may turn up before this gets closed in a week's time. --Randykitty (talk) 15:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Removing AfD template[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I NotifyOnline 11:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)