User talk:Doc James/Archive 163

Archive 160

Archive 161

Archive 162

Archive 163

Archive 164

Archive 165

→

Archive 170

Video

To give you an idea of what I'm thinking, the video on cholera has 16 images. I took a swing at starting a video on Indian Peace Commission as seen here. I'm not even through the first section, and I'm at 29 images. So I'm looking at probably 150-200 images for the full article. To my mind, that's the kindof thing that takes full advantage of the format, but it's completely impossible to manually manage attribution for 150 images. GMG^talk 15:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo looks like it is coming along nicely. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

At any rate, what is the outlook for at least starting with the low-hanging fruit, and updating the license to 4.0 instead of 3.0? GMG^talk 13:47, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo sure happy to have the license changed to CC 4.0. Other specific requests? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:55, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

None that don't require some level of coordination with a programmer unfortunately. GMG^talk 22:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo I am collaborating with Pratik and User:Hassan.m.amin, the programmers. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh. Are they interested in feedback on the interface? Not sure what kind of time they have to commit to it. GMG^talk 23:17, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

I am sure they would be happy for further feedback. Let me see if I can solve the upload issue first. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

On a related note, if we want to include screenshots of the interface on Commons, as we currently do, we need an explicit declaration that the software itself is freely licensed. Otherwise, software is normally protected under copyright, and the screenshots would have to be deleted. (See also c:Commons:Screenshots.) GMG^talk 13:25, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo there is a declaration that the software is under an open license somewhere. It is running on WMF servers. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Where is "somewhere"? Unfortunately, servers don't really factor in. I'm really not trying to be a pain in the ass. Sorry if I come off that way. Just trying to dot the I's and cross the T's. GMG^talk 00:02, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo no worries."VideoWiki's software is released under an open license (GNU General Public License 3.0) on GitHub." Is that what you are looking for?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:07, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

First off, doggone User:BD2412. Nice presentation. Back to James, an on-wiki description normally would not suffice. This should be incorporated in the disclaimer at the bottom of the interface itself. Shouldn't be terrible difficult to do. GMG^talk 00:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo the CC BY SA at the bottom here[1] is not sufficient?

You are wanting the license of the software added to the footer? Sure we can do that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:39, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Legally, no it is not sufficient, and under the current framework, screenshots ought to be deleted on Commons under COM:SS. It has to explicitly state that the software itself is freely licensed under a particular license compatible with Commons. GMG^talk 00:57, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo if add "the license of the software to the footer" is not sufficient what are you looking for? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:59, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

If the software is licensed under GFDL, then that fact should just be added to the disclaimer at the bottom of the interface. GMG^talk 01:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Specifically, it should say "The VideoWiki software is available under the GNU Free Documentation License". GMG^talk 01:13, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes that is what I have requested User:GreenMeansGo :-) Give it a couple of days. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:14, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

You know, back when I gave that presentation, a lot of people in the audience thought that it just couldn't be done. Funny how times change! BD2412 T 02:06, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. Curious. I guess the software is uploading now. Is that an indication the bug has been fixed or you recon it's just been queued for so many days and it took that long to upload? GMG^talk 19:54, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo I reported the issue to our part time programer. Not sure if it was an issue with videowiki or an issue with labs. They have not gotten back to me. Might be under the weather.

Regardless good to hear it is working. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:45, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo does the footer now work for you with respect to teh software license?[2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:56, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Works for me. GMG^talk 10:55, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

By the way looks like both of us got the upload to work in the end...[3] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah. Saw that. That's part of what makes me suspect that we both just queued the transfer, and it took neigh on three days to upload a 2.5 min video. The Video2Commons tool will do this kind of thing too. But an overnight upload is something you expect out of a 75 minute interview, and not really a couple of minute video. I presume this means the ~15 minute video it would take to finish the article would take even longer. Problem is the extent to which that's going to be off putting for users trying to learn the interface. GMG^talk 11:17, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I have uploaded a fair number of videos and usually it is a couple of minutes. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:41, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 12

News and updates associated with user scripts from the past two months (December 2019 and January 2020).

Hello everyone and welcome to the 12th issue issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

Scripts Submit your new/improved script here

XFDcloser (now a gadget) is this issue's featured script

Suffusion of Yellow's mark-reverted • Majavah's unslashifier

Guywan's BulletSort and HistoryHighlight

BrandonXLF's QuickEdit and CompareRevisions

Enterprisey's fancy-diff should now be able to handle everything the parser can throw at it.

Twinkle has a new update (more). It now supports partial blocks and includes the select2 library as a dependency.
Select2 is available at MediaWiki:Gadget-select2.min.js for other gadgets and scripts to use.

Miscellaneous

Until now, this newsletter has been written primarily by me (DannyS712).

If others would like to contribute, help is always appreciated;

this was intended to be a community newsletter.

Pending requests
A number of requests are listed at Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests#Some ideas.
Some of the remaining ideas include scripts to:

• expand a diff until it covers all contiguous edits made by that user
• highlight which content (in the HTML) comes from which template
• hyperlink "per X" to the last comment X made
• show a pop-up section preview when you hover over its TOC link

...and many more, all available at Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests

Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

---

• About the newsletter
• Subscription options
• Discuss this issue

14 Years

Hey Doc James about five months ago Guy Macon raised the issue of Captchas and the systemic discrimination they promote against the blind on your talk page. He said in 5 months if nothing had been done he'd be back. Well someone had been working on it an low and behold the project of fixing Captcha has been abandoned again. I've left a message on the ED of the Foundation's meta talk page but don't think I'll be getting anything more than the usual "put it on a wish list" response I've gotten in the past from Foundation staff. I know you are on the board and the board said they'd prioritize accessibility but that plan is a 3 to 5 year plan. Sorry if this comes off as a bit harsh but it seems like the WMF just doesn't care about the blind and is fine continuing systemic discrimination against the visually impaired. Can you point me in the right direction of how to raise this or where to go with it so that it finally gets addressed. I love this community but it literally hurts me thinking that we are so complacent with ignoring this issue. Regards, --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 05:07, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

For reference [4] is the ticket in question. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 05:08, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Were do you see that it has "been abandoned again" User:Cameron11598? I heard work was going to start on it this quarter or next. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:11, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

The latest update on the ticket says that the dev who had been working on the project is no longer working on it. With that I can only assume no one is working on it again. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 13:29, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Cameron11598 yah you are correct I missed that... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:38, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

No problem! Though I was wondering if you could provide some insights on if this is still going to be picked up or if it's been pushed back indefinitely again. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 22:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Currently have no idea. I will ask. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:07, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

A strange enzyme mentioned in Folate deficiency

Hi! I've noticed that you were among the active authors of Folate deficiency and I thought that it might interest you. I quote:

Diffuse inflammatory or degenerative diseases of the small intestine, such as Crohn disease, celiac disease, chronic enteritis or entero-enteric fistulae, may reduce the activity of pteroyl polyglutamase (PPGH), a specific hydrolase required for folate absorption, and thereby leading to folate deficiency.

I found no description of this "pteroyl polyglutamase (PPGH)" enzyme on the web. Maybe I was not looking properly, but maybe it's a malicious edit, who knows. --CopperKettle 18:39, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Usually known as "folylpolyglutamate hydrolase" but recognised. See PMID:1397183. Jrfw51 (talk) 22:00, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll look it up! I want to translate the 'folate deficiency' for the Russian Wikipedia, so I'm trying to make sure the article is good-quality. --CopperKettle 04:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

You're (beyond) Wiki Famous!

Just thought you might like to know, if you haven't already seen it already, that you've been mentioned in a WIRED article on the 2019-20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. Cheers!

• "On English Wikipedia, the pages about the outbreak and the virus have been locked to public editing. Currently, only editors with a username that is more than four days old and have at least ten edits under their belt can change its content. Anyone else who wants to edit has to ask an experienced editor to plug in their change. That happened, for instance, on February 3, when Doc James added a line about the first reported death from the virus out of China, in the Philippines, after the event was flagged by an anonymous IP on the outbreak article’s talk page."
• https://www.wired.co.uk/article/wikipedia-coronavirus

Nevermind! Just realized you actually gave an interview in the article, so chances are good you know about it. ;-) Sleath56 (talk) 06:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks User:Sleath56. Yes did speak with the journalist. The piece gave me a little more credit than I deserved. The community has done well on this topic. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Dekimasu#corona thingy

 You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Dekimasu#corona thingy. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:24, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Just left this on the main talk page...

quote == Urgent "spread" update, please... == Per https://meaww.com/coronavirus-wuhan-virus-can-survive-on-inanimate-objects-for-up-to-nine-days-any-surface-patient, the virus can survive on surfaces for 4 to 9 days depending upon temperature and humidity. I can't seem to update the info. unquote Sorry to bother you, but this seems urgent info. Cheers! Shir-El too 10:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

The underlying paper is here. User:Shir-El too good find. It is a review article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:14, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

REFERENCES

Hi

"over 90% of all leukemias are diagnosed in adults"--this is based on cancer statitics in the US. Cll is the most common form of adult leukemia in the western world, including the US.

thanks~

gastric cancer

Hi,from reading the source I don't think the 10% is referring to the global survival rate, that's why I removed it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3930964/ "more than half of radically resected gastric cancer patients relapse locally or with distant metastases, or receive the diagnosis of gastric cancer when tumor is disseminated; therefore, median survival rarely exceeds 12 mo, and in metastatic setting, 5-years survival is less than 10%. "

METASTATIC DISEASE In Western countries about two thirds of gastric cancer patients are diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Median survival for these patients is around 10 mo, and less than 10% survive at 5 years. Furthermore, even after curative resection, about 50%-60% of patients relapse locally or with distant metastases"

thanks~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikitruth1993 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Ref says "More than half of radically resected gastric cancer patients relapse locally or with distant metastases, or receive the diagnosis of gastric cancer when tumor is disseminated; therefore, median survival rarely exceeds 12 mo, and 5-years survival is less than 10%."

than "Unfortunately, more than half of radically resected gastric cancer patients relapse locally or with distant metastases, or receive the diagnosis of gastric cancer when tumor is disseminated; therefore, median survival rarely exceeds 12 mo, and in metastatic setting, 5-years survival is less than 10%."

"In Western countries about two thirds of gastric cancer patients are diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Median survival for these patients is around 10 mo, and less than 10% survive at 5 years."

So yes the body is more clear that this applies only to advanced cases. Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:57, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

the covid-19 rename request pages are fascinating

I think the WHO lost control of the narrative of the name when even myself as a public health trainee started forgetting to use the determiner "the" when referring to "the coronavirus". But I think it was a stroke of marketing genius calling it COVID-19. As you know that leads to wiki confusion however... Wiki consensus is a lesson to be studied, but for now I truly hope there's a quick change! If you have any interest in my proposal I would spend a fair to large amount of time with yourself or any contributor determining consensus and making the page. Cheers, have a good day! --Almaty (talk) 04:25, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Why do we say the disease is the cause rather than the result? --Almaty (talk) 06:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Almaty a disease is the cause of an epidemic (an outbreak of the disease) rather than a result of an outbreak of the disease. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:16, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes that's true but also the disease is caused by the epidemic. deferring to you of course hehe --Almaty (talk) 06:18, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Epidemics are of a disease they are not a cause of a disease. An epidemic occurs when lots of cases of a disease occur. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:22, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

point taken, thank you! I don't like "good hygiene" is there precedent? --Almaty (talk) 06:26, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Almaty yah neither do I. Just saying handwashing is likely enough IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:27, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

The meetings I have had involve a collective seizure around N95 vs droplet precautions but I think this is what the world wants to know. We should say something about masks, or is WP:NODEADLINE --06:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Cool. Please do something about the main page still saying ongoing Wuhan outbreak. Its so 1992. Seriously. --Almaty (talk) 06:41, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I can support the name change, plus update that one spot... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:50, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for that, the main page was what was irking me the most (but oddly what made me start editing again). What do you think of the graph? I think it provides a different perspective, and I don't think that it's overly technical. An editor thought it is a misleading statistic, but I really don't think so. Would like help with sourcing the disclaimer if appropriate. Thanks again. --Almaty (talk) 09:27, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Almaty I am fine with it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Disease nomenclature

Hi, Doc James! New to here. I respect your profession & have read some of the articles you have contributed to. Just wanna have a chitchat. Do you know why the World Health Organization dropped the words "respiratory syndrome" for the disease caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus? Sounds pretty inconsistent to SARS and MERS. The same happened to Ebola as well, from "Hemorrhagic Fever" to "Virus Disease". It seems like they want all diseases to be more easily pronounced by laymen?

Not sure what WHOs thinking is. I think coronavirus disease 2019 is reasonable, with the shortened form being COVID-19 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Text removal

NO, I DID NOT! This is the second message I've received about edits made with my name that I did NOT do! See the end of Copied from ProjectMedical talkpage.... Who do I take this up with??? BTW no one has access to my computer or password, I shut it down when not using it and I don't use a mobile. Do you have any idea what gives? This started after the discussion with User talk:SpicyMilkBoy Cheers! Shir-El too 17:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Hum. Here is the edit.

It is from User:Shir-El too

So either, you made that edit by mistake or someone has access to your account... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

IT IS NOT FROM ME!!! On top of that, someone or something just reactivated all the "Watch this page" function on pages I logged out of last night! HELP! Shir-El too 17:54, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Shir-El too Have you changed your password? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. MJV479 (talk) 16:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. I apologize for seemingly flooding your talk page with notices but I believe what you did was not right. You did what I believe was a poor handling of the situation. MJV479 (talk) 16:38, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I believe that "health.harvard.edu" isn't sufficient to use as a medical citation on wikipedia?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/

But i believe that this website would be sufficient for non medical wiki citations?--Disoff (talk) 03:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Disoff how do you want to use it? And can you provide some context? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:06, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Doc James I was reading this page: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/sad-depression-affects-ability-think-201605069551

and on a preliminary glance, i noticed that the Major_depressive_disorder page did not list some of the info on harvard's page.

In particular, the harvard page said: "It can also lower your cognitive flexibility (the ability to adapt your goals and strategies to changing situations) and executive functioning (the ability to take all the steps to get something done)."

Whereas ctrl+F on Major_depressive_disorder indicates that there is no specific mention of cognitive flexibility decrease. The MDD article also says: "Older depressed people may have cognitive symptoms of recent onset, such as forgetfulness,[25] and a more noticeable slowing of movements.[30]" while the harvard article doesn't specify age ranges.--Disoff (talk) 01:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Not sure it is needed for that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:43, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Okay, are you saying something like cognitive flexibility should be left off the dpression article?

We should likely have a better source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Electronic cigarette Article Changes, Reversions

As I understand it (and I'm novice but not naive) your reasons for an edit must be stated. The fact that you deleted another contribution at the same time that you "updated a reference" and changed it's preceding wording is questionable, i.m.o.

Additionally, I must have failed to see where the electronic cigarette article was noted as a health or medical article, but if it is and you are implying by the note you left on my Talk page that the additional paragraph and reference (in a different section than the "updated" ref change you made) was not a "high-quality" source, then it would have been proper to note that, rather than omit mentioning it.

I see by the Electronic Cigarette edit history that between you and QuackGuru (who for all I know may be the same person) are the defacto editor-owners of most of the article. And, it's a total literary and organizational disaster, with NPOV issues.

Calling it a medical article for the sake of obfuscation when undoing citations is disingenuous, at best. I'm a retired technical writer & editor, so I'll be around quite a bit in an effort to restore my previous faith in WikiPedia, fwiw. Page monitoring against vandalism is one thing, Gatekeeping another.

Medical content requires medical citations. Does not matter if the article is "medical" or not.

Not every global jurisdiction, nor every person considers them to be Medical Devices. No doubt this is why the article appears so contentious, and suffers from the large numbers of edits. Please be so kind as to direct me to how Wikipedia suggests handling this, if you would. Is a vape device considered a Medical Device without nicotine or flavoring? Who makes "the call"?Jd4x4 (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

You need to have evidence before you claim someone is a sock of another editor. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Correct. That is why I stated it the way I did. "For all I know..". That was intended to alert you to how it may appear, outwardly. Apologies if I've offended you, I'm generally unaware of Wiki-jargon and it's connotations.Jd4x4 (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Introduction

Thank you for reviewing my edits on the buprenorphine and the coronavirus articles. I just wanted to introduce myself as someone who also believes in reducing misinformation out there. While I can't watch articles daily, I hope to continue contributing to medical articles. That being said, if you feel there's something that's of urgency or prime importance, please feel free to reach out to me. I'm new but love to learn on the fly. Moksha88 (talk) 03:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Moksha88 sounds good :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:19, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

These edits

is it just me or is this guy shilling a bunch of entries for a particular paper/author? MartinezMD (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Looks like they are promoting papers by Kamoru User:MartinezMD Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Myopia page: references

Hi James. Thanks for your feedback. I went through the links you mentioned on my talk page, but they don't seem to provide sufficient clarity on which sources are reliable and which are not. In any case, on my talk page, I've replied to your message. I hope I'd be allowed to add facts about resting the eyes. I noticed someone had reverted your changes. Would just like to let you know that it wasn't me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navinwiki (talk • contribs) 14:23, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

You need to use high quality secondary sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed resolution

Why not write to Dr. David Levy at the Georgetown Lombardi Cancer Center and ask him what he and his co-authors of the "reality check" paper think of our e-cig article? dl777 at georgetown dot edu. EllenCT (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

That is a primary source User:EllenCT Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

It's a review: "To estimate youth and young adult vaping prevalence, we conducted a search of the literature through December 2017 using PubMed to find nationally representative surveys on youth and young adult vaping, particularly studies of trends. The search strategy consisted of the following keywords: (‘e-cigarette’ OR ‘electronic cigarette’ OR ‘vaporized nicotine’ OR ‘vaping’) AND (‘youth’ OR ‘young adult’ OR ‘adolescent’ OR ‘student’) AND (‘prevalence’ OR ‘use’). We also considered US surveys that collected information on tobacco use for either youth or young adults. We restrict the analyses to results from nationally representative surveys for youth and young adults aged 15 through 25, where smoking initiation and the progression to more established smoking generally occur." EllenCT (talk) 04:38, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Not listed as a review by pubmed.[5] Or for that matter by the journal that published it.[6] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:42, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

When you decide whether something is a systematic review, do you look at whether they performed a review systematically, or whether the PubMed data entry clerk checked the box? EllenCT (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

So they looked for "publicly available" data and than analysed it. They did not do a review of exiting research on the topic.

This does not justify removing National Academies of Sciences[7] or the Surgeon General's concerns. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:00, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Rcat reversion on Preeclampsia

The text of {{R from modification}} states:

Please note that there are are many more specific templates. Please use {{R from alternative spelling}} for...

The text of {{R from alternative spelling}} states (emphasis mine):

At present, {{R from alternative hyphenation}}, {{R from alternative punctuation}}, and {{R from alternative spacing}} all redirect to this template and feed into the same maintenance category. This is likely to change in the future, so please use the more specific template names.

What part of this did I misunderstand? Are all template redirects discouraged by some guideline documented elsewhere? Or perhaps was this not technically "hyphenation," and therefore I should have used {{R from alternative punctuation}}?

If the main problem was the edit summary, apologies for making it sound clickbaity; I will be more careful in the future. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

User:SoledadKabocha. Text on Wikipedia loads at different times which means buttons move around. So when you go to click one button you hit another by mistake.

You will see that I reverted my mistake 12 minutes before you left this comment. Let me know if I missed anything. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Acknowledged, and I will be more diligent in checking such things in the future. Most of those 12 minutes were spent composing this post + taking care of other things IRL; I realize that this caused some unnecessary hassle. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 06:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

User:SoledadKabocha no worries imagined as much :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

PCR

Hi. Just a few seconds ago I realised that you are the only admin on enwiki who is trusted with the PCR user flag. It must have required a lot of trust of the community —usernamekiran (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

oh wait. You did it yourself -_-
—usernamekiran (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

User:usernamekiran yah the tool was malfunctioning a month ago. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Can you please give me advice on this diff

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2019–20_coronavirus_outbreak&type=revision&diff=942410259&oldid=942410169&diffmode=source

I'm fairly sure you and I agree here --Almaty (talk) 14:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

The references are useful and should stay IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Heat[ed|-not-burn] [tobacco] product

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Page move problem". Thank you. I also botched the ping. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:22, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks and commented on the move request.[8] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Cancer Worksheets

Howdy, I know a designer who lost her husband to cancer 3 years ago. She just designed some worksheets for anyone to navigate the process, they are cc-licensed. More info here: https://www.fastcompany.com/90467322/this-designer-lost-her-husband-to-cancer-now-shes-helping-others-cope-through-design

Cancer Worksheets

I'm messaging because 1.) you probably know other editors in the medical community who specialize in this field, and they may find it useful. 2.) 'Cancer Worksheets' may be worthy of a WP article someday?

Victor Grigas (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Victorgrigas thanks. These look very nice. If there are enough sources would be worthy of an article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Just the fastcompany article and the website right now afaik. Victor Grigas (talk) 00:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Maybe something more general like Healthcare worksheets? Not sure if there is evidence for that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:58, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

And the patient said...

Have another round on me! --^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Yah have seen that. Interesting. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

I question your description of this journal being a "predatory" one. It has been in publication since the year 2000. Its impact factor of 4+ is higher than the average journal (~3). It might be useful if you could expand on why you consider this to be a predatory journal. Virion123 (talk) 18:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I avoid it as per MDPI User:Virion123 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

On what do you base this opinion please? I am sure you have a good reason.Virion123 (talk) 18:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

On reading the link I now understand. Virion123 (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

does cataract cause amblyopia

Please add high quality references.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:33, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

https://www.allaboutvision.com/conditions/faq-cataract-surgery-lazy-eye.htm

Okay that can go in the body of the article. Specifically congenital cataracts cause it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:41, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Added it here[9] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:47, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Does rubbing your eyes cause astigmatism

https://www.bestlasik.org/0012683.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C3:4201:D70:815C:EE6F:C103:7A5F (talk)

Doubt it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

That source is no good enough. Please see WP:MEDRS Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)