Darnburn98

Can we be wikifriends

Hi Darnburn98, Can we be wikifriends? --Sleinadkcaj (talk) 15:20, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

Welcome to Wikipedia. We have compiled some guidance for new healthcare editors:

1. Use high-quality sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS). High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed.
2. Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
3. We use very few capital letters and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
4. Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities.
5. Do not use URLs from your university library's internal net: the rest of the world cannot see them.
6. Include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article.
7. Format references consistently within an article and be sure to cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books; see WP:MEDHOW.
8. Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
9. The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS.
10. Think carefully before working on featured articles (these have a gold star at top right). It is often hard to improve featured articles.
11. Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us. Please share these guidelines with other new editors.

– the WikiProject Medicine team

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Insomnia

Hi. Just for your information: I've removed the info you added to Insomnia "regarding classification of an identified insomniac." I think you didn't read Thorpy's paragraph carefully enough. As I read it, the list you added was of research topics, not patient diagnoses.

But I found another use in the same section for the Thorpy source :) and reformatted the reference somewhat. In fact, what I first noticed about your edit was the (apparent) date of Thorpy's paper: today. That almost couldn't be correct.

Keep on learning! There are lots of medical articles needing small or large improvements and all-too-few "medical editors" here.

Cheers, Hordaland (talk) 01:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Reply to Hordaland, appreciate your conversion of my edit, did not realise that the context was about research topics. However I have been thanked by administrator status wikipedians for my edit. This possibly shows that I was right to add the edit to this section. So should my edit remain or not in your opinion?

Thank you for the message, Darnburn98 (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

With the Thorpy source and the source suggested by Doc James on the Talk page, "Management of Insomnia Disorder", there could be a very interesting new section called Research. The list you added would belong there. --Hordaland (talk) 04:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Darnburn98/Cubinder has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Darnburn98/Cubinder. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 23:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment. I have made a few changes since your comment, might be worth checking out. If the article is declined or classified as a stub, how can I get other wikipedians to help out since it wont be in the main space? (New to wikipedia, still learning in the deep end) Thanks! Darnburn98 (talk) 14:14, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cubinder has been accepted

Cubinder, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 20:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rotatope has been accepted

Rotatope, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 18:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Rotatope for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rotatope 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/Rotatope 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. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 03:55, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cubinder

The article Cubinder has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable; not a standard mathematical term; all references are not reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Adumbrativus (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Cubinder for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cubinder 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/Cubinder until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Adumbrativus (talk) 07:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)