|The WikiProject Medicine Collaboration of the Month for June 2015 is Psoriasis. The previous collaboration was Gastrointestinal disease. We welcome your help!|
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Whaleto probably resolved. *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/188.8.131.52 possibly resolved by defaulting
With visible backscatter...
When did I start? December 2004 Hypertension. There were some from a previous IP address before that. 25 May 2005 - 
The Internet gets too much split up into little bubbles by commercial and governmental activity, Wikipedia started as a mostly foam-free effort.
WP is in general A Good Thing. Reference books should usually accumulate annotations as time goes on, and being able to make them directly, and share from others' made, into the text is on the whole a significant improvement. The licence applied to ganfyd is the first effort I know of to merge the huge advantages of WP with satisfactory conditions for a professional resource. Time will tell.
3 March 2006. Edward_Jenner is a good article. This is the result of an amiable effort by several people who want to write an encyclopaedia and was both fun and worthwhile. This is quite distinguishable from the efforts of the entryist anti-vaccination cabal who wish to avoid mention of their activities and are distinctly unWP:CIVIL about it.
Wikipedia:Notability (doctors). Derived. I'm surprised how little change it has received so far.
Improvements by afd
Contact field microscopy was a hoax. Deleted. Royal Rife remains. Assemblage Point - a hoax with coloured lights - is gone. Abrams is better after some research. Bioresonance damped out; Richard Schulz deleted.
To categorise me as interested in alternative healthcare rather than a WPedian opposed to quackery was not entirely helpful. There is no such thing as alternative healthcare, there is healthcare that works and healthcare that doesn't, and like the rest of my profession I rapidly adopt the bits that actually work, and try to discard the ones that don't. Most of the alternative health articles I get involved with on WP are arrant quackery, ripoffs, attempts to publicise fraud for profit and the like.
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Little_Mandate; [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Peter Fletcher| P__ F__ v1]; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Don_Croft
How/When to split pages 
Not just about ensuring SPOV, NPOV or reverting vandalism, but citing & verifying to defend against trivial, but highly vocal, minority viewpoints who often eloquently argue & post large number of references, most of which are selectively misquoted, do not draw the claimed conclusions or are anecdotal reports rather than null-hypothesis statistically-vetted duplicable-research.
Artificial induction of immunity putting several things in context.
- Medical controversy pages, and the causes of medical page controversies
Plutonium economy 
Fast neutron reactor now with added USP. The risks of nuclear proliferation are real, and the countries which stand up against it are to be praised, as, sometimes, are the individuals who take great risks to make clear those that do it.
Still here ...