User talk:Doc James/Archive 33

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

Thank you

Thank you very much for working on the DID article. I think you are just getting started, but I love that picture you just added and the changes so far! :) ~ty (talk) 04:14, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I can't blame you for that. I don't like controversy at all either. It's very upsetting, but this is an important subject. Anyway - thanks again!~ty (talk) 04:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Please read what I just wrote on the DID talk page under "causes". The problem is that some editors on the DID page take things out of context, so the meaning is changed - then they add a review reference.~ty (talk) 04:32, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

/* Complications */ Referenced epiphysiodesis for leg equalization, w/link.

Dear Dr. Heilman:

My addition was a reference to my own situation. I'm a polio survivor with extensive medical knowledge, and my right lower extremity is completely paralyzed by the disease sequelæ (except for toe extensors, whose nerve supply is from a different motor unit, and very faint responses in the thigh), which I had in Norway in 1954, at the age of four. This led to stunting of the extremity (3" by age 11), so that when I was under the treatment of Norwegian surgeons in 1961, in early puberty, they explained to my parents that doing an epiphysiodesis then on the left knee (as described in my contribution) would likely result in equalization of the limbs by the time of epiphyseal plate closure. It was done, and has. Likewise, there were problems with abnormal outward rotation of the limb due to agonist/antagonist imbalance, which was resolved by Dr. Joseph Fitzsimmons Sr. in San Jose, CA, by severing the tensor fascia latæ at its proximal insertion and then removing the muscle body, which resolved the imbalance. These are both examples of superb surgical treatment of polio sequelæ by excellent pediatric orthopedic surgeons, which I will always gratefully remember.

If formal encyclopedic references to actual medical literature regarding the preceding are necessary, then, of course, you or I will have to revert my addition. I felt that I was just adding detail to the material, not adding fresh information.

I was very surprised to learn from the polio article that epidemic polio is a 20th-century phenomenon. Are you aware of any research that indicates why this is so?

I suffer from post-polio syndrome as well, which is an indescribable bother.

Helge Skjeveland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helge Skjeveland (talkcontribs) 05:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

We at Wikipedia have no way to determine the expertise of our editors and thus our text must be supported by the references we use per WP:V.
Google books is a useful place to find supporting refs. With respect to epidemic polio being 20th century this is a good ref [1] If it was do to a change in the disease (like we see with some strains of influenza) or simply greater travel I am not sure.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 15:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

translation article dengue fever

Hello Dr. Heilman,

I am translating the third part of the article on dengue fever and I have a quick question. I know that "health care professional" is a general term that includes various professions within the health industry but do you think it would be right in this context to translate it as "doctor"?

Thank you in advance Stella — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stellastr (talkcontribs) 09:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

At Wikipedia we are writing for a general audience which means we are not writing specifically for patients or for doctors. This page discusses things in more depth [2]. In many places people other than doctors treat these conditions. It however is a bit of a judgement call. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 15:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

DID talk page

Per your comment on my talk page, you are probably correct, but since it has already been replied to I would rather just leave it. That page already has examples of people replying to things and then the original comment disappearing, which makes it a huge mess to follow and really screws up the context. DreamGuy (talk) 23:32, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I should say I suggest you cross it out. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 00:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Re Circumcision

Re: "Looks like your efforts to improve the article are going well" Thank you, sincerely appreciated! Hope to get the new lead in there soon, and free up more of my editing time to work on some more science and medicine articles. Zad68 02:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Please reconsider

Hi Doc James, would you please reconsider this change you made to the proposed new lead? I'm basing this on

  1. the part of WP:LEAD that states "If an article's title is a formal or widely accepted name for the subject, display it in bold as early as possible in the first sentence". The article is "circumcision" and not "male circumcision" so I'm not sure what benefit there is in including the word "male" in the bolding against the WP:LEAD recommendation.
  2. It appears that overwhelmingly when reliable sources talk about "circumcision" they mean "male circumcision." For example, in the 2010 WHO report on Circumcision and HIV prevention calls it "male circumcision" 52 times and "circumcision" alone 127 times, so 2.44 times more frequently "circumcision", and this copy of the AMA's 2000 recommendations about neonatal circumcision uses "circumcision" alone 74 times and "male circumcision" 4 times. I picked two documents I happened to have open to do the counts, so it's not a representative sample but it's along the lines of what I've been reading.
  3. Talk:Circumcision discussions over the years like this requested move from 2008, this requested move from 2009, this requested move from 2010 and others. Including "male" in the bolding looks like an invitation to open up that can of worms again for no visible benefit.

Appreciate your attention. Zad68 18:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure and done. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 18:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Page number/URL

Re this, that's actually deliberate. I like to use the page number as the url field 'cause in some cases the book itself has a wikipedia page (i.e. the DSM) and this way the page number takes you right to the actual page of the citation. It's a personal preference, there's no guidance or policies saying you should.

Mostly just to note that you'll see that pattern repeated throughout the page if you're looking to systematically correct it. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 22:37, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Just never seen it done before. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 22:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note

Hi Doc. Thanks for the note about MEDMOS and the order of sections at Melanoma. Appreciated. Nurg (talk) 11:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

your response to my question

Ok. Thanks a lot! I will choose best option for Greek. Stella — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stellastr (talkcontribs) 08:02, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

GreatDoc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 15:32, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Conversation flow and signatures

What's with the "(if I write on your talk page please reply on mine)"? It makes conversations (such as the one you had with Tylas above) difficult to follow. Certainly, if anyone had to review such a conversation in the future (for example, if someone said something that needed quoting in an RFC) it would be nearly impossible to extract the context in which comments were made. Also it bulks up your sig and my eyes go to scan the bloody thing every time I see it, wasting precious seconds from my life :-). Anyway, I hope you stick around at DID long enough at least to mediate a bit and set an example. Glad to see you citing textbooks too :-) Colin°Talk 09:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Certainly. I am happy to hear suggestion on how to shorten it. Usually I reply both on my and the other talk page but in this case I did not. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 15:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Well replying (differently) on both your and my talk page is certainly confusing. Basically the only folk on WP who play conversation ping pong are newbies. And they quickly learn that a threaded conversation has to be held in one place, rather than split in two. As I noted above, it is impossible to decode in future (even for participants) and very difficult for non-participants to decode at all. I'm getting fractured conversation snippets appearing on my watchlist when you are involved. Also, I think that holding the conversation in one place is just polite to the person involved. For example, my comments about your sig/etc concern you and you alone and belong here. Not on my talk page with my set of watchers (tiny though that is, in my case). You can see that for a more serious issue, this might be more important. The ping-pong model doesn't scale to more than two participants (someone may wish to join in), or when there is more than one issue to discuss and respond to. Wrt your sig, it is one of those "what if everyone did that" problems. It is slightly annoying for one person but if loads of folk added 50 chars to their sig then we'd drown in them. On 90% of the cases you post, the comment doesn't apply or is confusing since you aren't on a user talk page. The fact you have to keep reminding folk is an indicator of how at odds this approach is and a bit like asking to be treated as a special case by everyone.
IMO when one posts on someone's talk page, it is just polite to watchlist it for a while. To not do that is like phoning someone to say something and then hanging up so they have too call you back to reply. And watchlisting the talk pages of those you are currently active with is useful at times. For example, it is how I find out Bittergrey is indef blocked. Have a think about it. [I'm watchlisting your page, of course, so there's no need to post on mine :-] Colin°Talk 17:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks good points. I try hard to stay away from controversy (with out much luck mind you). I will mull it over. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 17:44, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
User talk pages represent an archived history of a conversation. Playing ping-pong with a discussion makes it very difficult for historians ;-) Boghog (talk) 20:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I also took the liberty of adding the magic word __WP:TOC__ (see WP:TOC) to make it easier to navigate your talk page. Boghog (talk) 20:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
No worries. I like to keep my watch list article oriented. Keeps me from getting distracted. If people wish me to notice what they write they will need to write on my talk page. When people leave me comments and I do not reply on their talk page I am concerned they will not see my reply. With my efforts in this translation project I am dealing with a lot of new users and people from other languages versions of Wikipedia. Thus my note. Agree it does make histories harder to follow. I will try to put exact copies in both places going forwards. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 23:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

translation volunteer

Although I have not much time available, I would like to help with the WikiMedicine translation project. My native language is Portuguese (BR) and information on my resume and experience is available at my link in ProZ www.proz.com/profile/81273. mvfconde. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvfconde (talkcontribs) 15:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. We are working on getting together a team of translators in Portuguese right now. I will send Enrique another note.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 15:31, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:HIV/AIDS/GA1

Hi James! Great work so far on the article. I've given the final review and hope that it'll get fixed. I'm going to a tour to Goa so, won't be able to pass the article till 10th August. All the best! :) TheSpecialUser TSU 02:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 01:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

help with red tape

I am also a physician. I wrote a section with the same red tape title on Jimbo Wales user talk page but have not received a reply. Can you halp? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.21.217.33 (talk) 02:59, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Would be happy to look at it. What IP / user name where these concerns written under? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 13:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

"A half day at a UK University is being arranged for Aug 2012"

Hi - over at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Speaking_tour - I see the phrase "A half day at a UK University is being arranged for Aug 2012" - I don't suppose you might tell me where I might find out some more information on this? Fayedizard (talk) 19:25, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Here [3] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 22:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

explain "please use secondary sources"

Hi James, Could you please explain the comment "please use secondary sources" in your reversion of Herpes simplex 15:52, 30 July 2012(Reverted to revision 503290788 by Jerome Charles Potts: please use secondary sources). I'm not sure how the cited source is considered inappropriate. Thanks. VitCBeliever (talk) 19:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi VitC, I hope Doc James doesn't mind, but I'm sure one of the first things he'll tell you to do is read: WP:MEDRS, and pay careful attention to its discussion of secondary sources. Zad68 20:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Exactly thanks Zad68 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 22:18, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
If you're having trouble figuring out what a secondary source is, then WP:USEPRIMARY and WP:Secondary does not mean independent might be helpful. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:24, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Doc James, Zad68 and WhatamIdoing for the guidance on secondary sources, and the Wikipedia philosophies in regard to medical articles and primary sources.VitCBeliever (talk) 02:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes and welcome. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 04:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

BMJ and Wikipedia

Hi James, there's an article in the BMJ entitled "Should clinicians edit Wikipedia to engage a wider world web?" http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4275 - I don't know if you have a subscription or have seen it, but I thought it might be something that you'd be interested in. If you decide to respond, please let me know, as the office at Wikimedia UK is tracking these sort of articles. Do you think Jfdwolff would be interested? Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 21:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Rexx Just catching up. Real life getting in the way again. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 01:50, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Volunteer

How do I volunteer without exposing my personal info and email? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilingualworld (talkcontribs) 16:00, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

This is going "public" according to guidelines. Could you guide me how to answer just to you? I am a Spanish translator and Teacher who teaches medical Spanish and sent an email explaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilingualworld (talkcontribs) 17:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Great looks like you have.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 17:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) You might like to read Wikipedia:How to not get outed on Wikipedia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

help with red tape

I posted on User talk:Jimbo Wales and got instructions from others but want an administrator to confirm these. Mr. Wales did not respond. The advice was that I may start an account under the provisions called WP:IAR and clean start. This is the altnernative to going through bureaucratic red tape. Would you kindly give me the ok? I pledge not to do anything that would cause your reputation to be diminished for giving the ok. I could sneak and start an account secretly, but being a physician, I always maintain the highest ethical standards and do not play tricks or anything like that.

About five years ago, I came to Wikipedia for a week or two. I am a physician. I added some information about several diseases. I then made the mistake of responding on a talk page of a politician's wikipedia article about his wife's cancer, which was being discussed. I was then blocked accused of pretending to be a doctor despite uploading a photo of my MD degree. That would be like you being banned because I falsely accuse you of pretending to be a doctor.

Again, my request to you is to give the ok for me to follow others' advice to start a new account based on the clean start and IAR guidelines. 72.21.217.33 (talk) 17:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I was planning to write to you and saw that I just did earlier. I would prefer not to attract attention by dragging out five year old postings and going through red tape and personal attacks. That is why I am not asking for you to investigate. Rather it would be comforting for an administrator to affirm that a physician who posted a few rational comments five years ago may come back under clean start and IAR. Any ban or restriction should then be based on curent misconduct. 8.18.145.144 (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not have any concern with you starting a new account. Simply do not ever use the old account again and you should be fine. By the way I am looking for people wishing and able to help me with this project here [4]. Any interest. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 18:00, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

References to PE article

Thank you for making appropriate changes! My copy of the 8th Edition of Robbin's Basic Pathology (ref no. 45) says,

Pulmonary embolism has an incidence of 20 to 25 per 100,000 hospitalized patients. Although the rate of pulmonary emboli (as assessed by autopsy) has declined from 6% to 2% over the last quarter century, pulmonary embolism still causes about 200,000 deaths per yer in the United States.

The reference you mentioned is good, and it deals exhaustively with the subject, so I think we should go ahead with it. I would like to see the Epidemiology section re-written for good, even if it involves moving/deleting the references I have added. And yes, I am not an expert in the subject. Happy editing! -- Netha Hussain (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

We very much appreciate your help though. Those of us who edit medical content are few and welcome more to join us. If you ever need help with sources drop me a note and feel free to make more improvements. Robbin's is typically a good place to start. Would you be interested in helping with this project btw? [5] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 18:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the invitation! I had signed up for the project (for the language Malayalam) when it was at its beginning stage, but lost enthusiasm as I could not figure out how to use 'Translators without Borders' for translating articles to Malayalam (ml) language. Now I see that the project has grown considerably, and that it is using ProZ.com now! I have created a profile on ProZ.com now and will try to work with it. I had been translating medical articles from English to Malayalam manually since 2010, and working with this Project might help me do that more efficiently! Thanks again for the invitation! -- Netha Hussain (talk) 18:43, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

"if I write on your talk page please reply on mine"

Hi -- I'd like to gently discourage doing that. The effect of it is to make it extremely difficult for anybody except you and the person you are communicating with to follow the exchange. I understand your motivation, of course, but I don't think that's the right solution. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 02:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that there is any obligation to make things easy for the uninvolved, but perhaps a request for a {{talkback}} would serve the same purpose (which is to keep Doc James from missing important replies on the many user talk pages he leaves messages on). WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
The issue is that I am dealing with a very large number of new users with my work with the translation project. Thus the note. I typically reply in both places. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 05:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Please have a look at Dissociative identity disorder

Wow! Do you ever deserve these!

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Awarded to Jmh649 for his untiring responsiveness in the torrent of chatter that has characterized the Talk:Dissociative_identity_disorder page. I know you did not want to be there, but I cannot thank you enough for coming to help! There is great gratitude also for his multiple valuable contributions to the article itself. ~ty (talk) 02:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Civility barnstar.png Civility Award
Awarded to Jmh649 for his unfailing politeness while working on the Wikipedia DID article in the face of some of the toughest obstacles probably found on Wikipedia! You Sir are impressive!~ty (talk) 02:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


Hi,

Someone who is familiar with writing medical articles is desperately needed. (I reviewed one of your GAs and have read other of your articles, so I know you are.) The situation at DID is getting nasty fast, and many personal remarks are being made on the talk page.

DID is a high profile diagnosis and wikipedia should have a clear and factual article about it, as many will look here for information. Also, there are advocacy groups and other partisans putting forth questionable information. The fact that DSM-V is being worked on also adds to the fray, as well as the existence genuine controversy in the field.

I trust you judgment and hope for your help! (I also asked Casliber who said he knew the time was coming when he should be involved.)

Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 16:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Sigh will take a look. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 16:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
ok. MathewTownsend (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Do you think some of that extensive wording on the controversy (along with all the footnotes) could be moved out of the lede? Shouldn't the lede just briefly describe the controversy; then it could be elaborated upon in the article? All those footnotes make it look like a war! MathewTownsend (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
I totally agree with what MathewTownsend just said. I am sorry, I know you must be a very busy man! ~ty (talk) 20:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Help! DreamGuy is threatening to revert the DID article, saying that I "whitewashed" the controversy out of the lede. What can be done if someone has a agenda like that? MathewTownsend (talk) 22:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Dreamguy is in the policy position to revert. The next step would be a WP:RfC rather than an edit war.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 23:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
p.s. and he is back insulting Tylas again, trying to scare her away, just as we were getting somewhere with her. Please help, or the article will be a mess again and the talk page filled with vitriol. Is this the way to treat another editor when she is showing she responds favorably to reasonable treatment? MathewTownsend (talk) 22:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
I agree Mathew! Doc - from the day I first began to try and edit the DID page both editors that were there (WLU & Dreamguy) were swearing at me, trying to run me off and looking me up off WP. They have ran me off numerous times and I still I have only 2 edits standing on that page - both about the images. I don't want to have my way on the DID page - I don't have a way to want! I simply want it to reflect accurate information about DID. So many others editors have gone through this same thing with the same 2 editors that watch the page. I removed anything bad I wrote. I am sorry. It's confusing sometimes between pointing out things and attacks. Either of you can delete anything I write on the talk page that is inappropriate. I don't mean to write bad things.~ty (talk) 23:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Many people are at each others throats. All must stop filling the page with personal commentary. I have left this suggestion on both these users talk pages. Article talk pages are for improving the article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 23:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm done. It's hopeless. I've never been rude to anyone. I've seen the history and those two guys have controlled the article. They get votes on the medical page from a couple of regulars there who support them no matter what, without knowing anything about the article. I saw it happen. Thanks for your help though. You (almost) made wikipedia seem like a reasonable place. Thanks! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh no! Please don't leave Mathew! You have never been rude to anyone. I need your help! Please!!!!!!!! Let's just fix whatever it is that Dreamguy has complaints about. The many people that suffer from and treat DID need your help to fix this article!~ty (talk) 23:40, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Just as general advice it is never a good idea to concentrate to much on a single topic area. There is so much on Wikipedia that needs improvement. With most topics it is easy and one can learn a lot while they are at it. Simply grab a recent review article on topic X and begin. Spending too much time on controversial topics can drive one mad :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 23:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────* No thanks! I've reviewed 168 articles for GA recently. No more for me. Just to give other people babbles. I'm tired of doing the work so other people can chase me away when I actually get interested in an article. I told Casliber to nevermind bothering helping (he said he wanted to) as it's hopeless. Unfortunately I see all too much on wikipedia of this kind of thing. It's impossible to avoid seeing it. Unfortunately, it's an ugly place. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Doc, I know you are just trying to help, but the problem is that THIS article is one of the articles that needs the most work and I do know quite a bit about DID. I am not emotional about it. I am not emotional about most things. I prefer to avoid conflict however when I can - as I would think most humans do, and I don't mind the upset on the talk page and article as long as in the end the reality of DID is presented on the page. The problem has been that I cannot do it alone. Please help. I will stay and work on it as long as I have help.~ty (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Mathew - I agree, we can't change WP. What we can change is the DID article.~ty (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
With all due respect, Mathew, to pretend that Tylas is being attacked and I and WLU are not is quite ridiculous. I am not trying to run anyone off but merely to point out the rules editors have to follow in order to contribute here meaningfully. If people cannot do that because they are so caught up in what they personally believe, that's a WP:COMPETENCE issue outside of my control. DreamGuy (talk) 23:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Reading the talk page of DID is difficult. Hopefully going forwards all can keep themselves topic / reference focuses. Much of the article needs better references.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 23:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Doc. I don't know Mathew, and have never talked to him off the public pages on WP, but I believe from what he said he read the talk page history, where you will see what he says is true. Right now, they are not attacking because you and Mathew are there, but as soon as you are both gone they will begin again. I don't care what they call me, but I do care that the correct information is on the WP page about DID.~ty (talk) 23:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I have seen many of these editors work and I respect all of their efforts. Thus I hope that the issues in question can be addressed to the satisfaction of all and the article improved.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 03:41, 30 July 2012 (UTC) Okay. I can dig up references to fit into just about anywhere in the article if that is how it must be done. Thanks Doc.~ty (talk) 01:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

No worries. I forgot to come here to answer. I was doing as you asked and Dreamguy reverted back to an old version. I put it back and moved the text. I don't understand why those 2 fight so hard to make the page actually reflect what DID is not. This has to be an extreme POV. It has to be! How much more extreme can it get? ~ty (talk) 02:02, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
This is quite the project. I am use to just writing from what is in my head. I will get that short little paragraph done tonight though. Even copy and paste does not work with this text (that I can figure out) I do see the importance however, so onward I go! :) ~ty (talk) 03:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
I did not mean it that way. I write what's in my head after reading an article of course. When I write it then it's easy to find where I got it. Maybe I just need to sleep on it. I could write a book in the time it will take to do that DID page. I can see why you like to avoid controversy. Good luck with your migraine article. :) ~ty (talk) 04:34, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Doc. I did my homework as you can see in the DID page history or my sandbox, but WLU removed all the direct quotes. I thought I should let you know what was going on. I just got the hang of it too!~ty (talk) 01:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Reply to "Truth" - I have been thinking about what you wrote on my talk page. I have stated many times on the DID talk page that I do believe in and understand iatrogenic methods, perhaps it is because I have felt that I have been trying to fight a loosing battle there since the day I began and I don't want to fight any battle! I just want a good WP page on DID. I think iatrogenic method should be on the page. What I have tried to defend is that traumatic and iatrogenic simply are not equal, not that iatrogenic methods should not be presented. I will try and be less defensive. Anyway, that's how I feel about the whole thing. :) 07:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
My confusion. It won't happen again! I got confused with so much going with that paragraph! I am so glad to see you back!~ty (talk) 17:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Okay. Writing needs to be done slowly though. What we seem to be ending up with is duplication of the same content both within different sections and within the same section. For example in this edit we now say "When untreated, the mental illness DID is chronic and recurrent." followed by "A person with DID rarely recovers without treatment". That is different wording for the same thing.[6].Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 17:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
I totally get it and will slow down. I was trying to do the direct quotes for each sentence (here) and it was new to me so made a mess. I understand it now. I am learning to slow down.~ty (talk) 18:09, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

I just saw a note by you on Mathew's page under "progress." In response, I can only way this: WOW! I thought it was rough at WP but I had no idea. With you, Mathew and Casliber at the DID article there is finally some headway. I would love to see other editors come as well. You are one tough man! Taking on ER med and WP controversy! I am proud of you! You so deserve this award!

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Awarded to Jmh649 for his valiant assault against the fraudulent use of Wikipedia to silence survivors of severe child abuse through gross misrepresentation of DID and working to make a balanced, accurate article. (i.e., Dissociative Identity Disorder). Thank you Doc! tylas (talk) 08:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

wp.it etc

Hi James - I've now posted the Italian query here and will keep an eye out for developments. —Misty(MORN) 20:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Apparently, Dengue, Type 2 diabetes, Anaphylaxis, HCV, Common cold and Syphilis have already been translated from en.wp onto it.wp (links). And Gout seems to be in the pipeline too. —Misty(MORN) 22:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Wow which versions where translated? Where they after these articles where brought to good article / featured article status? Would be great to talk to the person who has done the translations. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Adert did several. And Obesity too! —Misty(MORN) 23:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Aplasia translated Dengue, Adert did the rest. All the versions translated had already reached GA/FA. —Misty(MORN) 00:02, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Now can we see if they wish to join this effort with Translators Without Borders? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: References

Hej Doc. Thanks for comments at my page. I'll try to follow it in future. Regards, --Andrux7 (talk) 08:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

Talk

If you are there can I spare a minute with You, keep you in touch, thanks.--GoShow (...............) 04:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure feel free to drop me a note anytime. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Just wondering if you can check my Talkpage and give me any pointers or edits on how to stabalize the archives, thanks--GoShow (...............) 00:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

HIV/AIDS

No, that's really ok. I'm not a medical writer. "Present with" does exist. The other changes that I made are so minor, plural s and stuff like that, please leave them, I'm really quite sure about them. Otherwise i don't see any language problems. Oh, one thing, you guys are Canadians, right. Well I guess the little changes that I made, are if anything, U.S. English related. i was 10 years in New York and six months in Toronto, so there you go. What matters, really, is that it's a great article. AndreaLange (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful many thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know I've left a brief progress report with a couple of queries on Hamiltonstone's talk page. I thought I'd bother him first, rather than you, because you seem to be be pretty much in the eye of the storm always! Best, —Misty(MORN) 19:22, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Re:Translating medical article from English

Hi! Yes, we have already started some translations (examples: dengue, Hepatitis C, Hepatitis B, Obesity, Alcoholism, Diabetes mellitus type 2, Wilson's disease, Anaphylaxis, Crohn's disease, Pituitary apoplexy, Smallpox, Common cold, Poliomyelitis, Subarachnoid hemorrhage, and other...). Currently we are working for gout and pneumothorax. It is our intention to continue on this road and maybe fill in all the 15 articles proposed by you. bye bye! it:user:Adert --80.182.60.172 (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: dengue

Hi,

regarding the dengue article: I'm happy to be credited under my real name, but personally I don't think my contribution is substantial enough. If I look at the wikichecker stats for that article now, I think you should be first author and Jfdwolff senior, and all the rest should be indeed subquoted as "collaborators" or via some link to frozen contributor stats (although it would seem weird to have an article published "by Wikipedia" with only two names on it... tricky). I like the idea of publishing articles to honor scholars for Wikipedia involvement. From my previous articles I've had good contact with Gunther Eisenbach. Keep me informed on how this develops, but it's easier to contact me via gmail.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Things are a little delays as we are still figuring a few things out. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:07, 8 August 2012 (UTC)