Dikke poes

Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, Dikke poes! Thanks for weighing in over on the Breast implant article discussion. Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:

• Take a look at the New contributors' help page, the Wikipedia Tutorial and the Manual of Style, and If you still need any help, you can always post your question at the Help Desk.
• When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia and Assume good faith, but please keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
• Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
• Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends: Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: ~~~~. Best of luck, Dikke poesc, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 16:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi about the radiography page

Hi

I am not sure how to do what you want to do with the radiography page, I think that in part it is a people problem rather than a technical problem. A group of people who are involved in medical radiography want to try to dominate what radiography is, they say that every medical imaging activity is radiography and every medical use of radiation is radiography.

Also they like to make a great thing about the idea that radiographer is a "protected term" in UK law. I am sure that they have not properly considered the existance of industrial radiography and the fact that radiography is an activity, not every person who uses radiography is a medical radiographer. This is in the same way that if a police man picks a lock he might be useing lockpicking skills but he is not a locksmith. Cadmium

Dear Dikke, I hope you like the industrial radiography page, I think that you might want to reconsider one of your recent edits. You removed some text from the first paragraph which explains how that radiography is not an attempt to modify a object but merely examine it. I think that this is needed becuase the medical radiography brigade are keen to include radiotherphy within radiography. Hence I thought that it was important to explain that radiography is an examination rather than a modification, we should note however that any radiographic work will always modify the object being examined slightly by giving it a dose of radiation.Cadmium 20:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Dikke, thanks for contacting me via my talk page. I think that you are doing a good job of the radiographic pages. I think that I will be editing wikipedia less and less with time as I have started to become involved in Citizendium. I suspect that I might quit WP in favour of CZ.Cadmium

Breast implant article

Hey Dikke, I just wanted to thank you for joining in at the talk page for the breast implant article. Your contributions have been excellent and it's fantastic to have a new set of eyes on the article. :)
Don't feel bad, your comments about meatpuppetry did not make you sound like an asshole. Other people (myself included, I might add) agreed with you and I looked at each account quite carefully and ruled out a few but in the end, it really didn't make any difference because no one made any convincing argument against using Dr Zuckerman's version of the article as a starting base. Anyway, I just wanted to tell you to try not to feel bad about it. :) Cheers, Sarah 18:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Dikke

Dikke, I left a note on the breast implant talk page responding to your pondering about how to treat/make sense of some of the issues on that topic. I realize it's difficult for people with passing familiarity of the topic to try to make sense of it. At least in the United States, it is a heavily politicized topic among those objecting to their reintroduction to the market here which can be seen in the long-term issues with the editorial tone of the article. The easiest way to grasp an accurate view is to start with mainstream 3rd party sources (health ministries, independent systemic reviews, and textbooks) and see how it's treated there. I can point you at those if you need direction. There is little ambiguity in the consensus reflected there which is a long way from the innuendo that has constantly crept into the article. BTW, a major update on one of the largest longitudinal studies on autpimmune phenomena is just going to print at [PMID 17321754]. Cheers, Rob. Droliver 01:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Admin

This was accidentally posted on the userpage; I've moved it here

Are you an administrator? If so, I hope you can help. Samir, DrRuben, Sarah, and other administrators have all repeatedly asked that a straw poll be used on the discussion page of the implant article, before changes are made. However, droliver has not done that.

I am directly quoting many of the same references that droliver uses, but if I use quotes that he disagrees with, he deletes them. The issue is not who we are quoting, but whether we include both sides of the controversy. Drzuckerman 16:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Straw polls on every point are not reasonable. Brief discussion and working towards a consensus are the only suitable methods here. I note Drzuckerman has no problems deleting what she disagrees with. I remain opposed to the reinterpretation of study results as per WP:NOR. JFW | T@lk 02:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator (I'd probably have a user page then :) but what can an admin do that I can't? In this case, I think it's only protecting pages when they're going through edit wars. I've done changes on the main page also, and without straw poll. Polls are only so good anyway. Post the quotes in question on the breast implant talk page, then make Oliver state what's wrong with them... and the other way around. What he adds and you have problems with, quote on the talk page and say, the problem with this is (state here). Dikke poes 15:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)