Talk:MiniMed 670G
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about MiniMed 670G.
|
sourcing, content
[edit]About this - The sources provided were not great for content about health. Provided a very good, objective source. The content changes were removing inaccuracies. Removed "patented" because every drug and device that comes to market is patented; it is trivia and doesn't help people understand what the device is. Medtronic is actually an Irish company now. The date for the FDA approval was wrong. I added the "stub" because the article does need a lot of building out, using WP:MEDRS sources and following WP:MEDMOS for structure. This is a pretty exciting device and I intend to work on it to flesh it out.
I am not saying anything about you but you should know that Medtronic has a pretty negative history in WP (see this article in The Atlantic), so new articles about Medtronic products get watched very closely. Jytdog (talk) 17:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your edits. I had concerns with them because you removed some important words. I now understand why you removed "patented", but why not tag "Irish" to the company. Let's have a good source for that other than your own statements if at all we have them. Also, why not link FDA? Stub is justified, again. I appreciate your editing and edification, but let's consider each other's inputs here. And, whoa! I didn't know about THAT. Pretty nasty, huh? Best, Nairspecht (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- I will be fleshing this out with time per MEDMOS and MEDRS - this is just a start and there is little point in arguing about it as it will change a lot in the next week; what is here now will be a dot in the bigger picture. Please don't add trivia or incorrect information in the future and please use strong sources. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 18:02, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- That is a very inconsiderate way of advising, plus slyly taking ownership of the article. Anyways, rest assured, I won't be touching it. Best, Nairspecht (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Of course you are free to help expand it - that is why I said " Please don't add trivia or incorrect information in the future and please use strong sources," assuming that you might want to. I can't make promises about what you will do but I can tell you my intentions. There is just no point in arguing about the exact wording of this stub that is going to become transformed very soon. Jytdog (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Noted. Best, Nairspecht (talk)
- Of course you are free to help expand it - that is why I said " Please don't add trivia or incorrect information in the future and please use strong sources," assuming that you might want to. I can't make promises about what you will do but I can tell you my intentions. There is just no point in arguing about the exact wording of this stub that is going to become transformed very soon. Jytdog (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- That is a very inconsiderate way of advising, plus slyly taking ownership of the article. Anyways, rest assured, I won't be touching it. Best, Nairspecht (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- I will be fleshing this out with time per MEDMOS and MEDRS - this is just a start and there is little point in arguing about it as it will change a lot in the next week; what is here now will be a dot in the bigger picture. Please don't add trivia or incorrect information in the future and please use strong sources. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 18:02, 6 October 2016 (UTC)