User talk:Bticho

Marshall Parks

Welcome to Wikipedia! I've taken notice of some of your contributions and created a stub for Marshall Parks should you wish to contribute. If the article can be expanded sufficiently within the next five days, it would be eligible to appear on the Did you know section on the Main Page. FYI, I believe User:EyeMD did a pediatric ophthalmology fellowship. Cheers! -AED 04:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions to the article are great! If you have references or links for some of the information that is currently not referenced, I'll be happy to format them into the article for you. The list of trainees may not be entirely encyclopedic, but it's certainly worthwhile to create article stubs for them if they meet the guidelines at WP:BIO and WP:PROF. Wikipedia:Copyrights can give you more information on images; you may need to get permission to use images that are copyrighted by others. Check out Wikipedia:Changing username for information on changing your user name. FYI: To sign your name with date stamp, type ~~~~. -AED 03:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strabismus surgery photo inserted

Welcome to Wikipedia! I have placed your strabismus surgical image appropriately on the Eye surgery page. The link for the actual image is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Disinserting_the_muscle.JPG and the code for inserting it into the wiki page is:

- the photos have been place in correct surgical order - first the rectus muscle isolation, and then the medial rectus disinsertion (yours). EyeMD 03:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shaken baby syndrome

Thanks for your note. The subject matter is largely beyond my area of expertise, but I'll forward your concerns to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clinical medicine. -AED 17:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I reverted back the Occular manefestations that had just been deleted, correcting the opening & closing ref tags so that it displayed correctly.

There is no need to use the whole URL address to the PubMed's abstract, if one has the Abstract number simply place it after 'PMID '. Hence PMID 12345 is automatically displayed as PMID 12345.
Even better, Diberri's tool at http://diberri.dyndns.org/wikipedia/templates can generate the full citation template markup for one, given the Abstract number. Simply select for PubMed ID and enter in the abstract number (see this example). One can then copy & paste the markup into an article (enclosing of course in <ref> ... </ref> tags)

Shaken baby syndrome though needs some reorganisation - it is getting quite long and your additional information is both perhaps a little too detailed too quickly (articles should slowly increase in complexity of knowledge) and sits awkwardly in the current article structure. The options (if everyone agrees the additional information should be kept) are either to redistribute your additions across the existing top-level headings or use of a separate article on teh topic, with SBS having just a brief paragraph introducing these ideas and pointing to the new main article on this aspect. See Talk:Shaken baby syndrome#Occular Manefestations for elaboration of issues and to debate approach :-) Yours David Ruben ^Talk 14:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great reference and especially the wording in the abstract of "subclinical vitamin C deficiency". Bone pathology is greatly effected by the subclinical state. May include more information concerning your insert of the reference. Unfortunately, the only problem is there are only guinea pig studies to cite. I have two good guinea pig studies to cite if you know of any other references please let me know.

Thanks again, The Stroll 02:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are not in disagreement. You need to get educated and read the studies and talk with the scientists instead of just going and finding articles and medical papers, before you put in information. Just because someone publishes doesn't mean tiddly squat. The article you cited is totaly bogus, babies don't have rigid necks. Why don't you get all the biomechanical - engineering studies and read them??????????? Then talk to all the scientists like it did!!!!!!!! How can you say that Bandak's study was disputed by other British researchers in January of 2005 and cite a reference when his work wasn't even published for another six months until June 30, 2005??????? This is totaly crazy and you are are an educated doctor????? This is totaly inaccurate!!! 70.171.229.32 06:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC) As for the paragraph you put back in the information is incorrect again!!!! You state that "Current injury criteria are based on high-energy, single-impact studies." I suggest again that you read the literature and the previous biomechanical - engineering studies that have been conducted over the years involving acceleration-deceleration (cyclic), rotation injury (cyclic), and diffuse axonal injury (DAI)(including cyclic). I would suggest that you educate yourself with Bandak's two recent publications in Forensic Sci Int, Duhaime et. al, and Ommaya and their references to see that these studies concerning low-energy cyclic loading have already been done through out the years. Uscinski's paper gives a very good summary of the literature that you should also read. As Bandak stated "In other words, lower values would not be sufficient to activate the customary mechanism of rupturing bridging veins that SBS solely depends on for producing SDH." 70.171.229.32 21:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I indeed had not read Bandak's publications. So, User 70.171.229.32 makes some valid points, albeit in a boorish manner. (She may have a personal stake in attempting to debunk SBS, I don't know.) In any case, I have decided not to pursue this matter further, and will discontinue any further Wikipedia SBS article edits.

Your expertise is requested

FYI: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ophthalmology has just been started. -AED 23:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exaggeration

Hello! I was a bit amused to see your edit to Residency (medicine) (someone else reverted before I). I don't know how familiar you may be with U.S. residency programs, but 100-hour work weeks or greater are not an exaggeration by any means. When my family friend was doing his intern year of general surgery, he easily worked 130-hour weeks. For the whole year. That's why the new 80 hour-per-week restrictions are such a big deal, and why programs are having such a hard time adjusting to fit that. (For the record, my residency program does an excellent job of staying within 80 hours per week, on average.) — Knowledge Seeker দ 01:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not experienced enough to form an opinion on which system is better, and I haven't read the article in detail, so I don't know if it is biased one way or the other. However, you removed the text "(100+ hour work-weeks)" with an edit summary of "No need to exaggerate", implying that you thought 100+ hour work-weeks were an exaggeration, which they are not. Perhaps you felt that the article was exaggerating the number of residents who actually exceed 100-hour weeks? Feel free to make further changes or to balance the article; I think the way you phrased your edit made you seem uninformed, and that's why it was reverted. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured picture promotion!

An image uploaded by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, Image:Desinsertion du muscle CO.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! KFP (talk | contribs) 18:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is also displayed on Portal:Medicine.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POTY 2006

The arrangements for the Commons:Picture of the Year 2006 competition are now complete, and voting will start tomorrow, Feb 1st. All the featured pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As the creator of one or more images nominated for the election we invite you to participate in the event. Alvesgaspar 17:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 11:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]

Beautiful Photo!

I would like to recommend your photo highly as featured picture of Japanese wikipedia. But it is required you to have account of Japanese Wikipedia. Can you do it? --Yukie Tachibana 橘幸恵 (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bticho. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]