User talk:Larry Hockett/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Medical Translation Newsletter

Wikiproject Medicine; Translation Taskforce

Medical Translation Newsletter
Issue 1, June/July 2014
by CFCF, Doc James

sign up for monthly delivery

This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice.

note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine

Spotlight - Simplified article translation

---

Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.

Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:

• WHO's list of Essential Medicines[1]
• Neglected tropical diseases[2]
• Key diseases for medical subspecialties like: oncology, emergency medicine (list), anatomy, internal medicine, surgery, etc.

We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.

What's happening?

---

IEG grant

CFCF - "IEG beneficiary" and editor of this newsletter.

I've (CFCF) taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.

Wikimania 2014

For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.

Integration progress

There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish.
What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.

• Swedish
  Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that.
  Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
• Dutch
  Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
• Polish
  Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article.
  (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
• Arabic
  The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.

Integration guides

Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.

Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here [3]

News in short

---

To come

• Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
• Proofreading drives

Further reading

• Translators Without Borders
• Healthcare information for all by 2015, a global campaign

Thanks for reading! To receive a monthly talk page update about new issues of the Medical Translation Newsletter, please add your name to the subscriber's list. To suggest items for the next issue, please contact the editor, CFCF (talk · contribs) at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Medicine/Translation Taskforce/Newsletter/Suggestions.
Want to help out manage the newsletter? Get in touch with me CFCF (talk · contribs)
For the newsletter from Wikiproject Medicine, see The Pulse
If you are receiving this newsletter without having signed up, it is because you have signed up as a member of the Translation Taskforce, or Wiki Project Med on meta. 22:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Online journalism in India

There is a discussion in talk:Online journalism in India about an article you may have interest in. The topic is Removal of mention of Amit Agarwal I.e. should this material be restored? Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 19:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

@EricEnfermero:Thank you for your recent edit at Nahzeem Olufemi Mimiko. Although am really interested in medical related article. I created the article MaI regulon, an area of Molecular Biology. And am looking forward to create more of such article. Can you put me through on how to be part of the medicine project. Thanks Wikicology (talk) 13:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Easy location to remember for WikiProject Medicine: WP:MED. Cheers. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 21:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Parksley Spuds

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

W. Walter Menninger

Thank you for your edits! It may make sense to reorganize the article in a way to break up the information from Scouting Magazine into different paragraphs to give a more chronological ordering, but if that is the biggest problem with the article now then it is better than most of the articles on Wikipedia :) Naraht (talk) 14:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your note! I was surprised that there was a notability issue here. I'll follow the AfD and try to do some more work when I return later. Your suggestion makes sense, I think. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 15:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Cool. Haven't seen anything from the original proposer or first commenter, but having had the one person change from delete to keep, I doubt there will be an issue. 3 keeps out of 5 at *worst* is a relisting,IMO.Naraht (talk) 21:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Frank Farley (psychologist)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cleveland Infants, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American Association. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Cardinals jersey numbers

AJ and Garcia switched numbers according to the Cardinals twitter page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Regkenny25 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

There's currently no recent post that describes anything like that. They must have changed their minds. I notice that they have not updated cardinals.com accordingly. Hint: In the box that says edit summary, you can type a comment in there to explain edits like this. Right now though, it's better to wait until a reliable source indicates such a change. I moved this comment to the bottom of my talk page and gave it a heading. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 20:42, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Kudos for Michael Henderson

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		This commendation awarded for making the effort that no one else saw fit to make, by expanding and sourcing Michael Henderson (doctor), and saving a good little article from AfD deletion through your work. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:08, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Well done. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:08, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for this, Dirtlawyer1! EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 18:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos Torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:17, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Disappearance of Beverly Potts

Hi,

Can you help me bring Disappearance of Beverly Potts up to Good Article or Featured Article? There's a book (Twilight of Innocence: The Disappearance of Beverly Potts) that we could cannibalise, and facts are not copyrighted. Paul Austin (talk) 19:23, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Naming convention

In your recent edit on Sanju Samson, you replaced 'Sanju' with 'Samson' but according to this Indian name, the name Samson is a patronymic, not a family name, and the person should be referred to by the given name, Sanju which is mentioned at the beginning of the article.Rijin ^Talk 07:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I misunderstood what was going on there. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 08:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 15 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Graphic Era University page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

EZSource

Hi, Eric. As the only other contributor to the article besides its creator, your input would be welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EZSource. Psychonaut (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Rusty Kuntz

The stuff about his name is not only trivial and doesn't belong in the lead, it is also from blogs, i.e. invalid sources... and his name isn't even pronounced that way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate understanding where you're coming from. The Big Lead is actually under the editorial control of USA Today, which I think mitigates the reliability issue that we have with most blogs. I thought that Bleacher Report had a similar arrangement. It looks like it's owned by Turner but I could still understand reliability concerns. This might be better discussed on the article talk page though. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 02:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Or maybe on the BLP page. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Not really a big deal to me either way. It's a pretty solid article even if we take out all that stuff, especially for a fairly minor contributor to baseball. If you feel like it's a significant BLP concern, I'm fine if you take it out. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 04:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Matthew Linford

Hi, per your de-PRODing remarks I've taken Matthew Linford to Afd. If you're interested you can comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Linford. Project Osprey (talk) 09:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

16:39:48, 28 October 2014 review of submission by Veron4best

• Veron4best (talk · contribs)
  • Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Caring Pharmacy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Veron4best (talk) 16:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I have further enhance the information with certain information captured from newspaper and so-on. I beg to differ that this is a non-bias information given.

I appreciate your work on this, but to demonstrate notability, the article should really focus on what other people have written about this pharmacy chain, not what the company has written about itself on its website or in press releases. There is still the feel that services are being advertised rather than reported in an encyclopedic manner. There are problems with close paraphrasing, which I am working to remove. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 19:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Tony Boeckel

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you on behalf of Brock nursing students

Thank you for your contributions to student learning in NUSC1P10. Your input, suggestions, and comments are greatly appreciated as the students and I learn about Wikipedia editing and contribute to articles. --LynnMcCleary (talk) 23:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

No problem at all, Dr. McCleary. I work as a unit-based educator right now and I'm looking toward PhD programs and the possibility of academic teaching because I really enjoy working with students. If I can help you with any WP-related matters, don't hesitate to ask. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 04:36, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello Larry Hockett. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit.

I'm not sure about the copyvio there as a lot of .mil stuff is public domain. I'll ask Moonriddengirl to review that bit. I have added spam to the deletion reason, however, as the text is rather promotional and nationalistic - "our nation" for example. Not MY nation... (I'm a Brit.) Peridon (talk) 10:59, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

You could be interested to look at the relevant section on Moonriddengirl's talk page, where she's answered my query. Peridon (talk) 13:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Interesting discussion. Hadn't considered the PD aspect; got a little overzealous trying to keep in mind the talk page thread right above this one. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 15:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Quite a lot of US government stuff is PD, and some Indian government - but the Indian stuff contradicts itself from page to page at times. As this shows, so can the US stuff. Basically, unless it says on the page itself or in an easily understood and easily accessible link that it is PD, assume it isn't. But also take the quality of the text into consideration. If it's promo, it doesn't really matter what its copyvio status is (or who its promoting, even). Same goes for CC licensed stuff. If it's promo, G11 it. Seems like only CC-BY-SA 3.0 with GFDL will do. CC-BY-NC-SA is out as it bars commercial use, and any other sort of restriction is out too. Ignore people who say their source is PD even if it says nothing on it, and unless there's an OTRS ticket, don't accept that stuff has been licensed. Deleted stuff can always be revived. When in doubt, ask MRG or VernoWhitney. They know this field in a lot of detail. That's the way I operate. Peridon (talk) 15:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Monte Irvin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Negro National League. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

RFA?

I'm sure I asked you this before, and @Go Phightins!: asked you back in April, but I wonder if you changed your mind. You are more active in administrative work like WP:AFC from looking at your talk page, WP:BASEBALL can use an extra administrator, and you have brilliant content contributions like always. I could write up a very strong nomination statement and I'm sure you'll pass with flying colors. If you are an administrator, you don't need to abandon your content work, only use the tools when you feel its necessary (deleting a copyvio for example). Secret ^account 16:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

+1 – yes, being an administrator has proved for me to be no big deal ... occasionally when I get bored with content, I check out a backlog and contribute for a few minutes, and then it is back to content I go. My RFA was painless, and I am sure yours would be too. I am willing to co-nom as well. Go Phightins! 17:25, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Very kind of you guys, but it's just not a direction I'd like to go. I know that there are all kinds of ways that an admin can contribute, but I just really enjoy staying away from anything resembling controversy or stress here. The occasional AFD vote or AFC review is enough excitement for me. :) Thank you both for your messages! EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 20:22, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Max Carey

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:12, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:BASEBALL editor spotlight

Hi Eric, I am interested in featuring you as the editor spotlighted in the inaugural editor spotlight of this month's Inside Corner, the project newsletter. If you would be willing to be featured, please answer the following questions:

• What is your favorite part of contributing to Wikipedia, and specifically WikiProject Baseball?
• What is the best article or list on which you have worked?
• After nearly three years and 17,000 edits, what makes you keep coming back?
• How could editors at WP:BASEBALL help or support you in your article work?

Thank you in advance! Go Phightins! 20:13, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

• What is your favorite part of contributing to Wikipedia, and specifically WikiProject Baseball?

On Wikipedia, we have a seemingly endless number of things to read and edit, which is a great thing for an avid reader like me. Even within WikiProject Baseball, there are thousands of articles, most of which can still be improved or expanded.

• What is the best article or list on which you have worked?

I was proud of my work to expand Arthur Irwin and Danny Shay, two interesting baseball figures who had only short entries initially.

• After nearly three years and 17,000 edits, what makes you keep coming back?

I think it goes back to the great stories that I get to read and expand. Baseball players are such an interesting bunch. Shay and Irwin are great examples. Irwin was an innovator across multiple sports and Shay was in baseball for a long time as well, but the off-the-field stories behind both guys are far more intriguing.

• How could editors at WP:BASEBALL help or support you in your article work?

We do a great job with an informal and fun WikiProject. I think that expanding the entries of Baseball Hall of Fame inductees should remain a priority for us. I've been slowly working toward getting all of those entries at least to C-class.

Thanks, man. Nice of you to think of me. Let me know if you need anything else. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 21:28, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

This is great. Thanks! Go Phightins! 02:17, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Minnie Minoso

Hi, I thought the 2 paragraph introduction for Minoso article, and the rest of his article was good? There now remains too many sentences that begin with "After"... and unnecessarily packed with added details, like for a book instead of an article, similar to the Billy Pierce (another Chicago player) article (book like and a pain to read). Are you satisfied with Minoso as is now? Ted Williams is considered a Latin player and was an All-Star in 1940s. YahwehSaves (talk) 07:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I was concerned that the lead was becoming as long as the body of the article, but that no longer seems to be the case. I feel like you guys might be going back and forth about the 56-74 HR record when there are bigger issues. For example, we have very little in the entry about his time in Mexico. I don't have a problem with a detailed article, as long as it is broken into sections. Roger Maris does have way too much detail about the Golden Era Committee (has never been on their ballot), but I think that Minoso's level of detail is fine.

All of this is best discussed on the article talk page rather than here though. We aren't really going to form a consensus on anything by talking about it on my page. Thanks. EricEnfermero ^HOWDY! 08:17, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Precious

"Successfully de-orphaned!"
Thank you, user striving to be "unbalanced in service of the truth", for quality articles on academic biographies in health care from Elmer Ernest Southard to your latest Karen Daley, for copy-editing with attention to the smallest detail at the end of a long article, adopting "a typo to nurture" (accomodation), and for "Successfully de-orphaned!" - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

This is so kind, Gerda. Thank you so much. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:25, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Infobox

Hello EricEnfermero,

I appreciated one or more of your edit on Yemi Akinseye George. Though there was a great improvements on the article but I have a concern on the "infobox" {{infobox person}} and {{infobox Officeholder}} serve different purposes. The previous one on the article was {{infobox Officeholder}}, which is a general infobox for any office holder irrespective of their offices. Although there are many specific infoboxes for specific offices such as {{infobox Governor}}, {{infobox Ambassador}}, {{infobox Judge}} and so on. However, Yemi Akinseye George is the President of Center for Socio-Legal Studies not just an ordinary person hence the use of the general infobox for office holder, {{infobox Officeholder}} applies in this case, which gives more information compare to {{infobox person}}. In Yemi Akinseye George article, the Known for does not serve its purpose in that article. The Known for means what makes the subject notable perhaps notable for a discovery in the case of "Newton" who is 'known for' "Newton's Laws of Motion" or Patrick Sawyer 'known for' being a career of Ebola virus to Nigeria. Yemi Akinseye George is not 'known for' been the President of Center for Socio-Legal Studies. I don't think a change is necessary in the infobox section in that case but I won't revert your edit on this, because you have really improved the article. I suggest you should always take the offices into consideration before making a change to them. I guess you will be my best friend here. Cheers! Wikicology (talk) 21:16, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your suggestion, but I think that you will find that there is more valuable information in the current infobox than in the previous one. If there are doubts, this is really better discussed on the article talk page so that we can have a more inclusive discussion. If holding a particular office does not make this subject notable, I would think it is probably not significant enough office to cause us to use Infobox officeholder. EricEnfermero (Talk) 21:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

you have a point. Cheers! Wikicology (talk) 22:33, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Jimi Agbaje

Thanks for your edit on the above article. Wikicology (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chuck Klein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Times-News. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Marshawn Lynch

Hi, Eric. Thanks for your contributions to wikipedia.

I see that when you undid my latest revision, you noted, "unreferenced that he said any variation thereof." Just wondering whether or not you listened to the video that's referenced right after the text which you reverted (i.e., http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2014122111/2014/REG16/seahawks@cardinals#tab=videos&menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap3000000448207 ).

Lynch did say "thanks for asking" to about half of the questions, but he also threw in "I appreciate it" a few times.

Bro rick (talk) 18:48, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your message and I apologize to you. When you inserted the "variation thereof" thing, it sounded to me like you were still referring to the "aksing" issue. I can understand your point now though. As a general practice, I think it's better to avoid using the video of the actual interview as a source, since the video is a primary source. Surely we can find a source that has written about this interview rather than relying on the interview itself. EricEnfermero (Talk) 18:56, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Bob Condotta actually tweeted a picture of a printed transcript of the interview: https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/546924612609519616 Bro rick (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Twitter brings up separate issues because people can publish things without editorial control. I would go with one of the newspaper articles online that covers this incident. EricEnfermero (Talk) 20:25, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Eric. Bob Condotta, the guy who tweeted the picture of the transcript, is actually a sports reporter for the Seattle Times. The article from the Oregonian mentions the variations: http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf/2014/12/marshawn_lynch_stiff-arms_repo.html With respect to the video, are you suggesting it be removed as a reference and replaced it with a source from a newspaper? Bro rick (talk) 20:42, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that would better follow WP's guidelines. Thanks. EricEnfermero (Talk) 20:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

One more thing: do you think that the paragraph in question (about his relationship with the media) should be set apart, or have a sub-head within the Personal Life section? It's directly related to his job as a football player.Bro rick (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I would take out some of the trivial personal life stuff (likes Applebee's) or move it to other sections (move the childhood stuff to an Early life section) before creating subheadings. In general, we should be discussing these questions on the article's talk page to give more people a chance to respond. EricEnfermero (Talk) 22:49, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Oops!

Thanks for catching my mistake on Josh Gibson. That article gets quite a bit of vandalism, and I just jumped to the conclusion that the last IP edit was vandalism. (It turns out they were correcting an earlier edit by another IP.) Thanks for checking the source and getting it right. BRMo (talk) 05:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

No problem! That was kind of a confusing situation in general. I run into the same "vandalism vs. just wrong vs. real" issue with the current players on my watchlist. There are lots of trades and signings this time of year, but a lot of the edits to a player's current team are also from people who are just messing around. After I revert a bunch of those on a particular player, it isn't easy to realize when one of those edits is actually the real deal. Have a Happy New Year. EricEnfermero (Talk) 06:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Ramesh Govindan

What do you think about this article? Can you please do a small copy edit for me? Thanks.--Mishae (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I made a few tweaks and also added a few things which I think will help to demonstrate his notability. He is the holder of a named chair at USC, a former editor-in-chief for a scientific journal, and a fellow of the IEEE and ACM, two respected academic societies. EricEnfermero (Talk) 01:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Thanks. But why did you removed Research section? Like, can we keep it as separate section like it is with Amit Sheth.--Mishae (talk) 02:03, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I didn't take out the section. I just changed the heading because the section became about more than his research. For most academics, research is an inextricable part of their careers, so it seems better to keep one broad section heading rather than creating two incomplete-looking sections. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:07, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

What if there will be more about research?--Mishae (talk) 02:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

That would leave the Career section very short. I don't think that's a good idea. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I decided to break it into sub sections: Early career and Research. Sounds good?--Mishae (talk) 02:28, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Not a good idea. Early career would be very short, as fellowships are not early career achievements. I would leave it the way it was and move on to another issue. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

O.K. What another issue?--Mishae (talk) 02:52, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter¹²³ (lecture) @ 21:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Articles on diseases

Hi Eric,

Thanks for your valuable comments. I will try to address the issue of getting only reliable sources as references. Also, on grammar, if you feel it is wrong, if you can go ahead and make edits, that might be great. But only if you have the time.

Also is there a defined list of reliable domains that I could possibly refer to?

-MightyPepper (talk) 16:21, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

So far, most of the grammar issues have occurred on posts that had other problems, so fixing them wasn't really the best solution. For example, in this edit, the source seems unreliable, but the bigger issue is that the contribution was copied directly from the reference with only a few words taken out of it. By taking out those words, the grammar does not make sense, but the edit still causes a copyright problem. When we take a sentence from another source, we have to place it in our own words, which is more than just removing words from a sentence.

For reliable sources, the websites of government organizations (CDC, NIH, etc) may be safe places to start. Journal articles can be reliable sources, but we have to be sure that they are not considered primary sources. WP:MEDRS explains this a little more. I hope this helps. EricEnfermero (Talk) 20:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I have been making some changes to the articles such that there are no copyright violations. I will clean up most of the articles within a day or two. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MightyPepper (talk • contribs) 06:29, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

In this article Cephalgiaphobia, you have mentioned copyright violation. However, I see the similar sentence being quoted from elsewhere in the introduction section itself - "Cephalgiaphobia is a psychological state that has been linked to prompting and sustaining the overuse of medication." -- MightyPepper (talk) 06:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes - that one needs to come out as well. I will let you remove it or rephrase it. There were so many problematic edits to these articles that I haven't gotten to all of them. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

John H. Guyer High School

Hi Eric,

I see that you continually change this page back after I edit it. Several years ago a friend who attended guyer made some edits to the page. They stayed and other people added on. I made a minor change and ever since you always revert the page back. That friend passed away. He was greatly loved and was seen as a friend in many kids eyes and they remembered his changing of John H. Guyer High School. Others added to that page over time. It became a thing at that school. Please leave it be for the sake of him. He was such a good friend to me. His changing of that page became a thing that students loved to view whenever they thought of him and his passing. Please, Eric, do not change it.

Thank you, Envyyyyyyyme 06:53, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Daniel,

If the memories of your friend messing up the page prove insufficient, you and his other friends would actually be able to see his old edits by going to the article and clicking on "View History" near the top of the page. Even the unconstructive edits (except for certain highly inappropriate ones that create legal issues) are saved in this history, so there is no need to continue editing the page in order to memorialize your friend. Your efforts to reinsert this objectionable material, including the assertion that there is a female wrestler named James, may create problems with our biographies of living persons policy. We will continue to remove this type of edit. Sorry, man. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:11, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Kazuya Tada

Can you see if I wrote this article correctly? I think realization is the same as inventing, but I might be wrong. Correct me if so. Thanks.--Mishae (talk) 18:55, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

That is not an easy question! It sounds like this person invented an improvement for an existing piece of technology. I would get an expert's opinion at the relevant WikiProject, WT:ELECTRICAL, just to be sure. I am not certain whether this subject would meet notability requirements either. Have a good day! EricEnfermero (Talk) 00:53, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Per WP Academic #1 it certainly will since her h-index is 25 which is according to user @Randykitty: (and he knows notability guidelines far more than any one else), is above the benchmark. However, maybe engineers are a bit different? Like, he once told me that different academics have different h-index requirements. Have a good day too.--Mishae (talk) 02:54, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I think you have a point. I looked at Google Scholar, but I must have been looking in the wrong column at the 10. Sorry I couldn't be more help with the original question. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Whatever the field, Mishae is correct that an h-index of 25 is generally considered to indicate that a person meets PROF#1. Lower h-indices, say 15, would not be notable in a high-citation field like this, but would be in a low-citation field like mathematics. But 25 is sufficient, whatever the field. Hope this helps. --Randykitty (talk) 08:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

Are you willing to review Hoyt Wilhelm for GA status? Eurodyne (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the fact that you reached out to me. I would rather continue expanding this article and wait on someone else to review it. My initial impression is that the portions about his playing career should be developed a little more for GA. As a Hall of Famer and an All-Star in several seasons, Wilhelm should be easy to cover in some detail. There are places where periods of several years are described with only a few sentences. I'll try to come back to it later and add some of the detail that I'm talking about. Thank you for working to improve one of our HOF articles! EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:00, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I would be willing to help out with the expansion of the article. You can definitely count me in. This is my first GA nom and I would really like your help. Thanks, Eurodyne (talk) 03:23, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure. No sweat. I've been able to help several articles through that process and have reviewed some in the past. I have to finish up some homework and I'll return to the article later tonight or in the morning. So many of our HOF articles are still at Start-class; it's exciting when they get expanded like this. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Since I picked it up for review, wanted to let you two know that, for the time being, I'll keep the review suspended until the article is expanded, so long as work is progressing and it's brought up to snuff in a timely manner. Just keep me up to date if things progress much more quickly or slowly than expected. Wizardman 20:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Wizardman. I will touch base. EricEnfermero (Talk) 21:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Wizardman, I think we're in a better position than we were a few days ago. Let me know if you think the review can proceed or if you have specific suggestions. I have been working mostly with stubs and start-class articles in recent months, so I'm a little out of practice with GA nominations. If we're still way off, I'm fine to renominate it later. Just let me know. Thanks! EricEnfermero (Talk) 13:31, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Infoboxes for Catchers

Hi EricEnfermero, CelticsFan76 here. I have a wikipedia-related question for you. In infoboxes for catchers in baseball, how come the only statistics listed in the infobox are batting average, home runs, and RBIs? How come a catcher's career hits are never listed? CelticsFan76 (Talk) 21:01, 20 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.91.39.66 (talk)

I try not to mess with infobox formatting too much because it's not an area that I know a ton about. I have looked at some discussions in the archives of WT:BASEBALL and my understanding is that it should just be Triple Crown stats (average, HR, RBI) unless a player was truly exceptional in another stat (like hits). I bet that explains your question; not too many catchers are hits leaders. I do note that Craig Biggio has his hits listed (he had over 3000) and he played catcher for a lot of his career. You might get a more thorough answer at WT:BASEBALL. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:17, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Robot Sensor

Thanks for your kindness and you assumed it as good faith. Regards: A.Minkowiski ^{_Lets t@lk} 09:46, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Hoyt Wilhelm

I thank you very much for getting Hoyt Wilhelm to a GA. I appreciate your hard work! Thanks again! Eurodyne (talk) 15:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem, Eurodyne! Each time I go through the GA process, I find that I learn quite a bit - both about encyclopedic writing and about the subject of the article. EricEnfermero (Talk) 01:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For doing a great job of picking up the drive-by GA nomination of Hoyt Wilhelm and turning a nomination I was sure would fail into a pass. You should sign up for the WikiCup and claim it for points. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:49, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate this message! I'm afraid that if I entered the WikiCup I'd never get any work or school stuff done. :) EricEnfermero (Talk) 01:50, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Psssh, priorities! – Muboshgu (talk) 14:09, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Eugene Braunwald

I have added sections to the above article. Can you see if I put them in the right order? Also, since there is 5 sections should this article be a C or B class? To me, its definitely not a Start class anymore. Many thanks.--Mishae (talk) 18:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I think they are in the right order. I would still call this a Start-class article, which WP:ASSESS would say "provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more." For such an established career, there is relatively little information. If he dramatically changed some of these areas of medicine, there is not a lot of explanation in the article. This was a helpful resource to me to identify gaps in the article. His contributions are pretty astounding. He is the only cardiologist in the NAS and he is a distinguished professor at Harvard. A major AHA award and an endowed professorship are both named for him. The categories allude to him coming to the US to escape Nazi persecution, but this isn't mentioned in the article.

Some of the existing references are problematic. The reference for the cardiology text is about eight years old. The mention of limiting outside pay seems unfair to him; it looks like he was concerned about conflicts of interest, not that he wanted to take money from faculty. The reference for the Darsee incident is probably not the best for serious allegations, as it represents one man giving a speech. C-class articles can lack some references, but you have at least one unreferenced direct quote, which is a problem for WP:MINREF.

Usually when I expand a Start-class article, I just worry about filling in the gaps. Most of the time someone will come along and reassess it when appropriate. I think you have a lot of things that are good starting points. Let me know if I can help in any way. EricEnfermero (Talk) 20:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, initially I didn't wrote the above article, I just filled in minor gaps. I usually mark my articles as either Stub or Start but I do have over 50 C class articles. The thing is, is that biographical Start articles are actually C class in say flora and fauna articles. With that said, someone did asked me a question here about Photinus pyralis weather or not the assessment there as B class was justified and weather it can be nominated for good article. I ran into some dead links, one of which I archived. Now I am wondering if I did enough to bring it closer to GA. If not, let me know and I will try to find more sources.--Mishae (talk) 22:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

You're right that it is difficult to compare article assessments between different types of entries. I have GA experience, but not in such a highly specialized area as beetles. I am not even sure about the typical layout/sections in such an article. Your best bet is to start a discussion at the WikiProject for beetles or for insects and ask for some help. One easy thing: I notice that most of the refs in that entry don't include a web link, but some of them (like articles at PNAS) will certainly have full text available online. Refs aren't required to be online, but when there is an online link, including that link makes it easier on the reviewer. EricEnfermero (Talk) 22:58, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes, when I can't find a link in the archive that is dead, I simply remove it, living everything else intact.--Mishae (talk) 02:07, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The full text links to some of those refs will come up with a Google search of the title. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015 Wikification drive

Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of WikiProject Wikify that the February drive has been started. Better late than never! Come on, sign up! :) Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hoyt Wilhelm

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 14 February 2015 (UTC)