This is a Wikipediauser talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Doc_James.
As I'm sure you're aware, a large body of research has affirmed that lowering LDL cholesterol lowers the risk of cardiovascular disease.
But you are certainly correct that it is unclear if lowering or raising HDL has any effect on outcomes such as heart attacks. Indeed, scientists are now questioning if HDL ought to even be called the "good" cholesterol.[1]
Hi,
thanks for the welcome mail.
I am currently working on a project to add information and citations from Cochrane nursing articles. From these I am adding only short paragraphs or sentences, not making major revisions.
Does this approach seem ok? Should I start out more or less ambitiously?
Just a heads up: you protected the ABVD article for vandalism/peacocking a few weeks ago. Now the protection is over and the rogue edits have restarted.
Ah, interesting. Okay. Although we have no image of a Pinel restraint, we have one of Philippe Pinel. A pinel restrain pic would be great if you can get one. We could add it and other images to Medical restraint, which right now has none. I think visitors would like that. Many thanks and sorry for the bother. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:47, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic! You are wonderful. And thank the young woman who was brave enough to get strapped down like that. You know, that really makes the article look great. Visitors will be well impressed.
One more thing, the commonscat has a number of images of restraints used, not to secure patients during procedures, but to restrain the mentally ill. Would those be considered medical restraints? If so, I will make a new category over there and add the link at the medical restraints article. An example is presented here at your talk page.
No, no, not me. I write a history column for my town's paper, and post that content to a blog. Recently, someone has been using my content to add to the History section for the town. References are links to my blogged columns. Any Wikipedia policy on referencing to an individual's blog? I suppose I could replace the refs in question with refs to the original sources I researched for what I wrote. David notMD (talk) 14:34, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In the article on Maynard, Massachusetts, the editor Swampyankee created content with refs to my blog. I am not disputing the content. What I did was substitute other references, with links when possible, to my source materials. On a separate note, Swampyankee has created six new articles about bits of Maynard that are either already covered in the article on Maynard or in my opinion could be merged into Maynard without that article getting bloated. However, I do not want to get into a merge fight with Swampyankee, who appears to be a very frequent creator of new articles. Any suggestions? The new (all in July): Amory Maynard, Maynard High School (Massachusetts), Fowler School, Green Meadow School, Maynard Public Library, Presidential Village. David notMD (talk) 20:29, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And that person is adamantly against merging the start/stub articles into the parent article. So I will not start a merge or delete dispute. I will suggest that my blog not be used as a reference for content. Thanks for your advice. David notMD (talk) 10:16, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
LoginNotify should soon be deployed to the English Wikipedia. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
The new version of XTools is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes administrator statistics, an improved edit counter, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on Phabricator and provide general feedback at mw:Talk:XTools.
Hi Doc James. In the headache article, would you be able to insert a link to occipital neuralgia? There is a brief mention of cranial neuralgia, but I am not sure whether that is the same thing, but in any case there is, at present, no dedicated link to "cranial neuralgia".
Furthermore, could you then refer to this neat treatment page[1] for occipital neuralgia triggered by the trapezius muscle? Or to a better textbook source which you feel may be more appropriate for Wikipedia? Referred trapezius headache is the first thing that comes up in google searches for lateral eyeache/headache, and that must mean it is a commonly experienced cause.
My concern is that at the moment, the headache article only briefly touches on the trivial causes and then expands on the sinister ones. Many an MRI scan could have been avoided if lateral headache/eyeache sufferers gave their cramped trapezius a quick massage to see whether that switches off their headache. It works in seconds/minutes.
I am requesting that the block from editing Vagina be removed. I understand the reasoning and have read the discussion on the talk page. Contentious editing and discussions do not have to stop improvements to the article.
Just had a quick look at this. Although Flyer22 Reborn and Martindo are obviously in a slow-burning edit war, I don't really think there was any need for a full-protection for more than 24 hours. Indeed, the protection policy states "Content disputes and edit warring may be addressed with blocks issued by uninvolved administrators while allowing normal page editing by other editors." so I am mindful to endorse Barbara (WVS)' request to unprotect the page, and give the two warring editors mentioned here a stern warning to leave the article alone. Sorry James, but your actions seem to be contrary to policy, so I really am minded to unprotect. However, I realise that will cause rancour so I'm going to hold off on doing so for a minute to let you reply to this. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)13:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Ritchie333 when a slow edit war is ongoing, IMO it is much less drama to fully protect an article in the prewar state than wade in and start blocking established editors.
The rest of the policy you quote is "Under the protection policy, an alternative approach is available as administrators have the discretion to temporarily fully protect an article to end an ongoing edit war. This approach may be better suited to multi-party disputes and contentious content as talk page consensus becomes a requirement for implementation of requested edits."
I agree with this general approach; however it does fall apart when it disrupts neutral editors who've had nothing to do with the dispute and want to edit in an unrelated area. Also, I only recommended giving the pair a warning and nothing else - in my experience although Flyer22 can be quite, well, passionate about the stuff she writes, if you tell her to back off a bit (using slightly more polite language, of course), she will. I'm not anticipating either of these will need blocking. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)13:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Doc James - I'm recently sort of 'feeling the weight' of writing about cerebral palsy and its management, particularly as I seem to keep coming up with the theme that therapies used for people with CP are non-beneficial or with low evidence for their use, etc. I'm a bit worried about the consequences of my findings and how they're represented in the articles. Are you aware of anything more in the vein of the uni of Kansas's writing guide for medical journalists, but perhaps with Tony1-style exercises? How should a person write about treatments/management options? --122.108.141.214 (talk) 05:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi James!
I feel the need to make at least a separate section about strangulated hernias, since the Strangulation (bowel) just redirects to volvulus without taking regard to other causes of bowel strangulation. Do you know if this case happened to be strangulated? There seem to be signs of inflammation around it.
Best regards,
Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:42, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
