User talk:FoodPuma/Archive 1

Welcome!

Let me be the first to welcome you and commend you on your enthusiasm and ability to follow instructions. The Wikipedia mantra is BE BOLD. For me at least, just making an account took a great deal of courage. The next logical step in your Wikipedia indoctrination is to energize your home page. It will serve as an excellent place to learn some of the basic wiki-codes without dorking up an article. Editing skills will require some experimentation and self teaching. The easiest way to start is to visit others and “steal” some ideas. By that - I mean click the edit tab and see their html codes which you can copy and paste into yours. CAREFUL --- don’t edit their page…. COPY not cut!!!!! You can then adjust it to reflect your own personal style. Feel free to be creative. Try to provide some insight into who you are while still maintaining your Anonymity. Personally I like the community’s use of user boxes to provide some insight into your way of thinking. --JimmyButler (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BIO

This user's favourite subject is Biology.

Some suggestions

Hi. It looks to me like you're very serious about this project, and that you probably won't mind picky (negative) comments. Looking at your draft of the article, I react to the word "resulting" in "due to a squeaking sound sometimes resulting from the joint". Can a sound result from a joint? It's probably possible to find a better word or phrase.

Sentence "This build up is surgically removed most of the time." needs improvement. See also paragraph below about surgery.

"It has been theorized that the increase in osteochondritis dissecans may be associated with increased participation in sports." What increase? In an individual, in society? Increased from what to what? (Partly explained in the following section, I see. Perhaps combine or move some info. Also, it may be good to give an indication of usual age at presentation/diagnosis nearer the top of the article.) Another thought: should osteochondritis dissecans be italicized throughout? (I don't know the answer to that question - take a look at lots of articles about conditions with similarly non-English names.)

"your pains ", "your blood stream " --oops, we don't write to "you" on Wikipedia. Easy to re-phrase. You'll need to consider throughout whether to refer to "one's pains" instead of "your", or to "patients", "sufferers", or to "people/an individual/a person with the condition" etc. Variation is good. Some people really don't like the word "sufferer".

I think physiotherapy is all-one-word, and it can, as such, be wikilinked. Advice: always check the article you're linking to, to see if it is indeed pertinent, and to avoid redirects and disambiguation pages.

"then surgery is necessary. There is an estimated 50% chance that this treatment will work without surgical intervention." Though some people^[who?][;-)] criticize weasel words, it is usually wise to moderate such statements as "is necessary" to "may be necessary", "often is indicated" or the like. The second sentence quoted needs a reference. Keep in mind, too, that Wikipedia articles are supposed to apply worldwide. "Necessary" surgery is hardly an option for most(?) people.

"disturbance of the usual growth process" Does "usual" here mean "normal"?

A quote such as "well recognized but poorly understood" needs citing.

Well, I got carried away here, with my red pencil. Most of this you'd have figured out yourself. Hope some of it helps. Cheers, --Hordaland (talk) 11:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Research Research Research --- Its all about the Research

You are well ahead of the pack on this one. For most of the class at his point - I simply am hoping for a confidence builder in the creation and editing of their user page.

However; Step 4 for this project --- I will share with you in advance. (Note: Step 3 will be to select your topic)

Locate and print every credible document that has been published on this subject. Sort out who are the leaders in the field. With access to NC-Wise [1] you can obtain a fairly significant journal data base; which should include many of the prominent medical references. I'll share the password in class. In the past, the in-class research papers for which this project is a substitute; I expected at least 30 references to be cited. For the Wikipedia assignment; you will be providing me a list of 50, listed on your talk page with links to either the abstracts or the full articles or the websites sponsored by credible organizations.

In obtaining GA status... much will be made of consistent and accurate formatting of references. That too will be topic of discussion in class. There are templates. Painfully tedious!

Point being, don't get too caught up in the formatting and phrasing until you have FULLY researched the topic! The research part is the heart of this assignment.

I do admire your enthusiasm! Of course now you have to share with your classmates how to add a picture to the Wikipedia data base. The price you pay for fame!!!!! --JimmyButler (talk) 03:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As to be expected. You've grasp the nuances and complexity of citations. The key is to use a consistent format; which on a brief scan appears to be the case. There is some flexibilty at the GA level; however, zero tolerance regarding accuracy and format in an FA attempt. I was fortunate to have SandyGeorgia (A wiki - Godess) beat ours to a pulp over citations, and then out of pity clean-up our mess; if you stick with your formating perhaps you can avoid such humilation! My confidence and thus expectations for success are increasing by the day... keep setting the standards. --JimmyButler (talk) 01:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted some general pointers to your Wikiproject talk page (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AP Biology 2008#Observations and pointers), and by way of appreciation for your nice comments back to me, I chose Osteochontritis Dessecans as my example for searching PubMed - go look at easy way to create {{cite journal}} mark-up, and (as per thread below on duplicated links) with ref-tag's name parameter already filled in for you .:-) David Ruben ^Talk 00:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Book References

Take a look at the Introduction to Evolution entry. We linked the in-text citations to the Book reference in an indirect way. Look in the Notes and find the author Diamond. See how that is linked first: from the in text citation; yet clicking on his name takes you to the Book references. Like everything else, I stole the codes without actually understanding the logic. Ex. ref>(Diamond 1992, p. 16)</ref was the in-text citation format less the first and last < and >. Then this code was pasted for the actual book under References: {citation |last= Diamond |first= Jared |year= 1992 |authorlink=Jared Diamond |title= The Third Chimpanzee: the evolution and future of the human animal|publisher= HarperCollins |location= New York |isbn= 0060183071 } less the first and last { and } to keep from being an html here. Not easy to explain... get with me in class. --JimmyButler (talk) 02:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Images from medical journals are usually copyrighted by either the journal or the authors, and usually both. Moreover, if the images display a person this person may have given consent for its publication in a journal, but not necessarily in other outlets. It can therefore be very hard to find suitable images for medical articles.

A small number of medical journals subscribes to the Creative Commons philosophy (e.g. the journal Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases), and these images may be uploaded to Wikipedia under the relevant license. Alternatively, you may need to draw diagrams yourself, or contact the authors of recent journal articles if they would like to send you an image that can be uploaded under the GFDL, CC or even public domain. JFW | T@lk 20:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

You've been doing a great job, but I noticed this, so I wanted to steer you towards Wikipedia:Footnotes#Naming_a_ref_tag_so_it_can_be_used_more_than_once. (If you use this tool, it automatically handles this issue for you.) --Arcadian (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FoodPuma

		The Original Barnstar
		Hi FoodPuma, I'm Prom3th3an and I am a experienced editor and helper of wikipedia. I have recently discovered your class's wikiproject and would like to thankyou for taking the time to contribute to Wikipedia with (what I can tell) upmost enthusiasm. Your effort is greatly appreciated. I look forward to seeing the end result of your article mid next year and most likly drop in and offer advice to you along the way as I am freely available to answer any quires you may have. A final word of advice would be WP:BEBOLD. All the Best «l\| Ψrom3th3ăn ™\|l» (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, thanks for offering help. I definitely will need it. :) --Somertime02 (talk) 02:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The feed back from the peer review was excellent. From my perspective, the article looks very good. Best of Luck!--JimmyButler (talk) 05:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, I had just finished reading the article when you posted. Maybe there will be an interest since so many admins. are watching the two projects. It would be nice to score first and send notice to our Canadian friends. You will just have to be patient. Unfortunately, the title is not likely to attract the attention of a broad range of Admins. --- its rather complex; unlike evolution which was like a magnet. I was frankly shocked at how fast the peer review went. Don't be disappointed if they find holes in it; although you've cleared the primary hurdles from the start - that being citation issues. Do you plan to go straight from GA to FA or is there more to this subject? --JimmyButler (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't shout for help

Your choice of edit summary of Help!, had me running there and I failed to see any problem ! I think your edit summary should have been more along lines "I must not imply ownership", however frustrated at yourself you may have been :-)

So anything I can help out with ? David Ruben ^Talk 23:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be away over this weekend, so no rush to grab my attention :-) David Ruben ^Talk 23:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nom

I might be able to review your nom this weekend ...but to tell the truth, getting through the GA backlog is a part of Wikipedia's reality. It can sometimes take several weeks. The best way to get an article reviewed is to review other articles. So roll up your sleeves and reduce the overall backlog by reviewing any article that interests you. Many reviewers are in high school themselves. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abstracts

You're doing a great job, but I wanted to point out: in this edit, you correctly added the citation to PMID 3316236, but you copied content directly from the abstract into the Wiki article. You'd need to either put the content into your own words, or put the phrase in quotation marks. --Arcadian (talk) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check your talk page: I was working in class and didn't have a chance to finish my editing before I left... It is however fixed now. Food_Puma 10:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing it. --Arcadian (talk) 13:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Half a step

Hi, thought it only proper to indicate the GA nomination for you at your project page thus :-) David Ruben ^Talk 22:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:OCD Lession-2.jpg

Permission to reproduce from emedicine: do you have proof for such a claim? eMedicine is copyrighted, if you have obtained permission via email, you should send it to WP:OTRS. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, your doing our articles a favour. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any permission on their part is very unlikely to comply with our guidelines, unless they ascertain that the original creator indeed licensed it under a creative commons license. An OTRS volunteer will look in to the matter once you forward the email: meanwhile, I've started at deletion discussion on Commons. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should suffice if you forward the email you got from them, they will determine if it is enough and they'll guide you through what needs to be done further. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This falls under a restricted or educational license, which is not allowed on Wikipedia (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing ) and should be deleted. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:41, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. You can upload your arthroscopy images in Commons:Category:Arthroscopy. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted material is reproduced here with their Permission." --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, there is a button you can use to contact the authors (as Wouterstomp (talk · contribs) just informed me). --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, I see now. I'm not 100% sure that X-rays that are property of the Uniformed Services University fall into the public domain, but I think it is allowable. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invite

Hi there FoodPuma!
	Please accept this invite to join the Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving articles to GA status while working with other users. We hope to see you there!

Osteochondritis dissecans lookin' good

Good work. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 09:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt?

If you want...though I'll warn you that I hate biology and so I know nothing about it—never took any bio classes! —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 16:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And a note: if you looked at my adoption page already, then you'll know what I am talking about, but you won't have to do any of the tasks because it's a school project. :)

Instead, I could be a mentor-person and just help with any questions that you have, etc. I know my way around here, so I can help show you some of the ropes. I've gotten an article (USS Nevada (BB-36)) through a GA review, an A-class review and a FAC candidacy and The Sword of Shannara to GA, so I can help you with formatting on your article/articles so they are ready for the higher levels (though it looks to me like this one is ready. =]). Cheers! —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 21:57, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good ahead and put this where you want it:

May I ask where your name came from...? I'm almost afraid to ask... :)

If you have any questions, post them here. Don't forget to watchlist it! Cheers, —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 23:12, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PING!

Puma! I saw from your contribs that you haven't edited since the 26th! If you decided to hang it up and leave, then good luck in your future endeavors, friend....and if you haven't but you are on vacation or something, then sorry for being stupid. :) —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 02:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I figured I'd drop by and ask a favor. I'm attempting to sort all of my Osteitis fibrosa cystica research into manageable, bite-sized pieces, and failing miserably. How did you decide on an outline/format for your article, and how did you streamline your research to match?Strombollii (talk) 17:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned a statistic missing a link in my article. It is from the same source as the succeeding information, Mayo Clinic. Should I cite the source twice, successively?Strombollii (talk) 15:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Strom. Put the source at the end of all the info in cites if it is all from one source. I.e.

Ed loves chocolate. Ed loves history. Ed hates English.<ref>BLAH</ref>

If blah covers those three sentences, than it is alright to do this. Did I answer your question? :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 16:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hah. Yes, and made me laugh. Thank you, Ed. Strombollii (talk)

No problem! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, what exactly is the difference between a pathophysiology section and a symptoms section?--Strombollii (talk) 17:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Max - thanks for stepping up and showing them how it's done! You've cleared the way of all excuses! --JimmyButler (talk) 00:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To bigger things

So now that you're in GA nomination, and the stress is slowly starting to cease... Lets adopt another article, eh?Strombollii (talk) 03:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

[2] Great work, pal. :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done for taking a difficult topic and working so hard to give the article breadth & depth. Its been a joy to see you work up through the learning curve of researching a topic, coming to grips with scientific writing and the finer details of wikipedia's publishing model. Few editors get articles to GA status, so I do hope you stick around after the needs of your course work and contribute to other topics.

Now not that any "invite" is needed, but seems only polite to offer you the {{MedInvitation}} tag :-)

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in contributing more to medical related articles you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (signup here).

David Ruben ^Talk 01:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		To FoodPuma, for improving "Osteochondritis dissecans". Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh boy, I think he's addicted...he's even working on the weekend now... :D —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 16:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't your teacher be proud... :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few {{fact}} tags for you...I think that it is stuff that will need to be cited for your upcoming FAC. :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review #2 (OCD)

Osteochondritis dissecans

Previous peer review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review in the hopes that I may nominate it as a Feature Article Candidate. While well-referenced with the information presented, I am sure it could use some elaboration on section such as "Prognosis." Your input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Food_Puma 23:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The "Bibliography" textbooks don't have many citations in the article. It would be preferable to use in-line book citations. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article. Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement.

For a layperson, the lead is very technical and intimidating. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article - can it be made a bit more accessible? My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but treatment and epidemiology seem not to be in the lead. Please see WP:LEAD
Also try to avoid or explain medical jargon as well as provide context for the reader. For example "subchondral bone" is not explained until the Pathophysiology section (nor is it linked). Or what is the Talar dome in Epidemiology? See WP:JARGON and WP:PCR
There are several bullet point and numbered lists in the article that might read and flow better if converted to prose
There are also several short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and even sections that would flow better if combined with others or perhaps expanded
The Infobox image has no arrow(s) to point out the symptoms and does nothing for me - I also note it is a knee as are the other two human images, should the lead say it is especially common in knees?
Since you already say dogs, I would just link German Shepherd Dog as German Shepherd
I would put the History section much earlier in the article, as well as a general description of what is going on

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas from Promethean

O'Hai there FoodPuma, Merry Christmas!

FoodPuma,
I wish you and your family all the best this Christmas and that you also have a Happy and safe new year.
Thankyou for all your contributions to Wikipedia this year and I look forward to seeing many more from you in the future.
Your work around Wikipedia has not gone un-noticed, this notice is testimony to that
Please feel free to drop by my talkpage any time to say Hi, as I will probably say Hi back :)

All the Best. «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk)

Wikihelp

Thanks for all the help, I'll continue editing and sent two emails to the respective imageholders. The flickr one was copyright protected too =[.

Books? Hmm. I recently read The Brief and Frightening Reign of Phil, which is a political allegory and also absolutely hilarious. The Blind Watchmaker is incredible, but I really haven't made much progress in it. For an actual story, I recommend Blindness by Jose Saramago, which is new, but downright amazing; or Bright Lights Big City which is impossible to find, but phenomenal -- it's a pseudo-existential stream-of-conscious book about a depressed guy. If you're a fan of Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country has recently graced my "read" list and managed to be both insightful and hilarious, while Lynne Truss' Talk to the Hand: The Utter Bloody Rudeness of the World is just mean. Strombollii (talk) 01:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hey, I saw on the project discussion page you listed a link for medical images and I was wondering how you put one in your article? I found an image I like for Brain ischemia but I don't know if it is okay to use? Speaking of the copyright and what not. Do you think you could help me out? Thanks, --Saunc2011 (talk) 16:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link me and I'll see what I can do. It's kinda hard to explain so I'm willing to just check it (if I can't tell I'll ask one of the doctors who worked on my article). Peace, Food_Puma 16:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks! I was thinking this one: http://rad.usuhs.edu/medpix/medpix_image.html?imageid=20376 It's one from that website you put on the talk page. Thanks a lot! --Saunc2011 (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, it will be licensed as works of the U.S. Federal Government (army) since it was created by James G. Smirniotopoulos, M.D. at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. I would suggest uploading it and asking someone to review the material/info you provided (include a link to the origional image, the same link here) and they can make sure you filled all the fields correctly. Cheers. Food_Puma 01:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Alright so this might be a stupid question but exactly how do I upload it? Gracias. --Saunc2011 (talk) 00:12, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Osteitis fibrosa cystica could use your help!

Unfortunately I'm short in time right now, won't be able to do much... sorry. cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 07:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias

YO, thanks for helping me with the penguins...the sites you gave and all that are really helpful. Can you tell me how to use one source 2 or more times in the article? You're not supposed to just list it twice, are you?--LNG123 (talk) 18:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TPS'ing here... The <ref name=""> feature...see WP:REFNAME. Cheers, —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 19:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Osteitis Fibrosa

Thanks for all the help... just got GA =] Strombollii (talk) 23:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...to be slashed down at the knees. haha. I may be seeking advice once more, FoodPuma. Strombollii (talk) 03:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So quick to revert my edit of Dwarfism?

I only added the link to the Twinkle tool for a colleague of mine who is actively editing the Dwarfism article. He has voiced some complaints over the rampant vandalism of said article and I was merely putting a link to the Twinkle tool that I mentioned to him. I can, however, simply post this link on his talk page and bypass your unnecessary revert process if I care to. I suggest you take the time to actually look before you go reverting next time, perhaps the material provided is of benefit. Cheers! Food_Puma 01:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind comments and display of generosity of spirit, it's really what Wikipedia is all about isn't it. If you had simply included the first sentence of your above comments to the Dwarfism article talk page when you added your mention of Twinkle, none of this would have been necessary. Given your reasoning for placing it on the article talk page in the first place, I'd suggest that posting it on your friends talk page was the preferred option all along. PS I'd also like to suggest that you run this 'exchange' and what precipitated it, past your "mentor" and see what they make of your actions. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 01:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are there now!

The most recent thread on your entry captures the true nature of Wikipedia; perhaps you can better understand why I was up at three in the morning responding to concerns and criticisms to the point of obsession. I'm beyond pleased at your efforts and diplomacy. Your responses are accommodating; yet, you stand firm on your own perspectives. Your FAC should prove interesting; especially if "readability" becomes a point of contention. Fortunately you have the support of a very active and talented group of editors. I think it is time to take the leap of faith! --JimmyButler (talk) 22:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good Luck!!!!!!!--JimmyButler (talk) 00:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also --- it is not uncommon for the first visits to be opposed. There are those that simply scan the FAC page and fire off generic opposes with little or no substances. They are often the first to arrive. So stay calm! Allow time for those that are clearly serious to review the article. Their comments - supports - opposes will have supporting text for their views. Only respond to direct concerns that you feel have merit. Avoid the impulse to defend every criticism. Not every comment left on the page will have merit. The impulse to defend will be overwhelming. Silence in some cases can prevent the escalation of a minor issue into a major battle of wills. Again --- you've managed to attract some of the best to your project; follow their lead and you will make it! --JimmyButler (talk) 00:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Nobody knows what to expect at this early time—it all depends on which FAC reviewers decide to comment. May I offer some advice? The FAC procedure is mostly positive; critical comments are the best and they carry the most weight, you should not take them personally. Everyone likes to see articles achieve FA. Argue your case if you think a reviewer is wrong, but be mindful that FAC is about reaching a consensus; you might have to accept a compromise. The reliabilty of your sources maybe questioned, (although this is unlikely since you have used PubMed), as may the licences of the images that you have used. Don't loose hope if and when you receive that first Oppose; many reviewers change their opinions once issues have been addressed. Graham Colm ^Talk 01:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go FoodPuma! Go!--Yohmom (talk) 01:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! :-) Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Way to go Puma! Feel free to ping me for help if you need it :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 08:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAC

Hi. I just reviewed the OCD article and posted an oppose. Don't freak! Stay cool. FAC is an important part of the process of developing an article to FA quality. If critical reviews did not help, and help a lot, few of us would bother writing them, because writing them is hard work. Your job is to set aside any feelings of dismay and use critical reviews to the utmost, to improve the article. Already one oppose (conditional) has switched to support, and that is by far the most valuable support the article has obtained so far. My reviews often do lead to major reorganizing and rewriting the lede, both jobs some editors really hate doing, but the result can be a far better article. --Una Smith (talk) 08:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picking on more children now, Una? Are you going to derail the FAC on ALL the articles these kids have worked on? First Yohmom and now FoodPuma? I highly recommend that you stop this now. Montanabw^(talk) 15:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find the comment right above by Montanabw entirely unhelpful, if not an outright personal attack on Una. The lede has improved significantly as result of her comments, even if it now contains clunky grammar. Xasodfuih (talk) 22:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Xas, it did sound a bit snide, and as such, I was not entirely setting a good example for young people. However, the editor in question knows why I said it. I also encourage FoodPuma to consider all legitimate suggestions from respected editors and to beware of feeding the trolls. I also encourage other editors who have not been part of the improvement drive on the article in question to make appropriate suggestions to FoodPuma and any other editors previously active on the article rather than diving in and taking things over. Seems to me that all the students on these biology wiki projects have been real good about listening to feedback and taking it when appropriate. Montanabw^(talk) 05:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Several editors have criticised the article (usually constructively) and you are responding appropriately. Some of the problems are difficult to address while pleasing everyone at the same time. You are doing a fine job. Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:11, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"It's position as a fringe medical article makes even the doctors over at ... WP:MED feel too uncomfortable to review"
— FoodPuma

You shouldn't assume this. The doctors at WP:MED are busy people with important real-life commitments. Axl ¤ [Talk] 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. :\ Food_Puma 10:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Osteochondritis dissecans now is rated FA. Congratulations! --Una Smith (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, way to go! - guess you get to pick a different MCOTW nomination - and then get it to FA before we get there ;) LeeVJ (talk) 19:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!!!!!!

An amazing accomplishment:

		The Resilient Barnstar
		Your tenacity and perseverance in pursuit of FA will set the standards for those students to follow! JimmyButler (talk) 18:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		To a fellow scientist, well done FoodPuma, Graham.Graham Colm ^Talk 19:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent!

What a grand occasion - osteochondritis dissecans featured. I feel a bit guilty for not being more helpful in the initial stages, but it looks like your hard work has carried it through. Carry on the excellent work! JFW | T@lk 21:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats mate! You truly deserved that one; I don't think that anyone ever believed that FA would be an epic failboat. Now for the real question...is this the end of the road or has the professional baton-twirler himself managed to drag you over to the dark side?--Yohmom (talk) 23:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DARN it...everyone got here before me. :) Way to go, Puma! That article is without question the best overview of the disease on the web. I hope that you are very proud of you accomplishment! By the way, I've got the same question as Yohmom above. ;) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 00:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FoodPuma! By the way, you are most welcome to join WP:MED. Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats. Excellent work. Raul654 (talk) 18:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work FoodPuma. Now it's time to throw down! And we must do an AP Biology parade too...

--Wikitrevor (talk) 21:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, puma. And thanks for all the help. Shall we throw down upon wikitrev's ascent to FA? My treat. Strombollii (talk) 02:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Medicine!

Welcome to WikiProject Medicine!

I noticed you recently added yourself to our Participants' list, and I wanted to welcome you to our project. Our goal is to facilitate collaboration on medicine-related articles, and everyone is welcome to join (regardless of medical qualifications!). Here are some suggested activities:

Read our Manual of Style for medical articles and guide to Reliable medical sources

Join in editing our collaboration of the week (the current one is Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease)

Discuss with other members in the doctor's mess

Have a look at some related WikiProjects

Have a look at the collaboration dashboard

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, or please feel free to ask for help, on talk page.

Again, welcome!

Maen. K. A. (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cardiology task force

Cardiology task force is looking for editors to help build and maintain comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Cardiology on Wikipedia. Start by adding your name to the list of participants at Cardiology task force Participants. ECG Unit (Welcome!)

-- MifterBot I ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maen. K. A. (talk) 09:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OFC GA3

Thanks for the support, MR. Strombollii (talk) 22:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help proofreading

I am working on a list and wanted to know if you would proofread the text for me? If available, I would appreciate your feedback. Regardless, thank you for your help on wikipedia. kilbad (talk) 00:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Teamwork Barnstar

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		Although you became a Wikipedian because you had no choice, you went far beyond what is expected of any editor. You quickly figured out the weird ways of Wikipedia. You mentored your fellow project members. You brought your assigned article to FA. And, you did it all with the teamwork of your classmates and the wider Wikipedia community. Thanks for being here. Hope you stick around. Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]