I contribute to Wikipedia since 2006[1] by adding, and seldom reverting (hence low edit count, but still >6K[2]).
I am mostly contributing to science and musical articles, although my interests are broad and change over time. I am currently more invested in Wikiversity, as it provides a great complementary platform with a different philosophy, allowing the introduction of scientific concepts via practical tutorials. I am often at WT:MED and I support WP:RETENTION.
My editing methodology is as follows: searching for high quality sources, read them, and then use them to write entries in a WP:BRD fashion. I edit Wikipedia as I would do a state-of-the-art literature review, so Wikipedia is a by-product of my own research but it allows me to follow a strict methodology, and that's very nice! I try to be a true (bayesian) skeptic and avoid pseudoskepticism.
If you disagree with my edits, it means either I am wrong, or you are wrong, or we're both wrong, or we're both correct and we don't know it . I never edit entries pertaining to my job or my interests (apart from curiosity ) to reduce bias. I will always be open to discussion to resolve these kinds of issues, so please feel free to reach to me (if I do not do it first). If nothing else works, please see what to do next in WP:DISPUTE. I comply foremost with WP:BRD, WP:PRESERVE and Wikipedia:Revert_only_when_necessary. I do my best to stick to WP:Wikilove, but highly dislike WP:BRR, WP:TENDENTIOUS, WP:ESDONTS, WP:BRD-NOT and WP:POVRAILROAD.
My own rules of behavior:
It seems my main abilities are in finding reliable scientific sources, and adding/revising content, as shown in xTools authorship of most articles I edit[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. That is not to say that deletionism is useless, of course it's necessary, like it's necessary for the brain to trim minor memories out to leave room for more significant ones, it's just not where I (and my brain) are good at doing
(Sorry, no fancy boxes here, I am not fond of personality traits categories... But if you really want one, I think I might be a Wikipedia:WikiDragon)
If you are totally new to Wikipedia, the best thing is to follow The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tutorial that will guide you through each step. When you will feel more confident in your understanding of Wikipedia's interface and how collaborative editing works, you can follow the indications below that are specific to medical articles on English Wikipedia.
The rest of this practical tutorial below pertains only to medical content, in other words to content pertaining to human health, where WP:MEDRS applies. For the rest, such as historical accounts or biomolecular content, the less stringent WP:RS applies instead (and if you want to follow good practices, use WP:SCIRS for non-medical scientific content). In any case, secondary sources are always to be preferred to primary sources.
For editors new to medical articles editing on Wikipedia, which follows specific more stringent rules different from the rest of Wikipedia, the most useful and quick tips IMO are to 1. watch the intro video below (3min), 2. read WP:MEDHOW or this document for a general outline of how to contribute (10min), 3. then WP:MEDRS to identify reliable sources (20min). All of these links will help in identifying what content is pertinent for Wikipedia.
Summary: a good reliable source is: 1. a secondary source like a review, or a tertiary source like an encyclopedia, 2. there are quality differences between reviews: guidelines are the highest (international > national > professional society), then Cochrane's systematic reviews are considered of very high quality, then systematic reviews and meta-analyses are high quality, then narrative reviews, and then mini-reviews, 3. it needs to be published by a reliable publisher, ie, not in WP:CRAPWATCH and generally with a PubMed id (PMID). If you use such reliable sources, your content should most of the time be accepted, but however not always.
To make your life easier, you can (ab)use of internal citation tools (additional tools here and more tutorials here), which can autofill all fields to cite a journal/book/website from just the PMID, DOI, ISSN or url, see the two videos below. Personal tip: always use the PubMed's PMID to cite a scientific work, this will both ensure that the work is referenced in PubMed (which is a positive indication on quality, if it's not on PubMed it's generally a bad sign that this source is not usable on Wikipedia, although there are exceptions). There is also a Citation bot to do additional clean up, or to check that you formatted the citations correctly.
Finally, but it's more daunting, read the WP:MEDMOS, WP:MOS, WP:REFPUNCT and MOS:WORDS to know how to format your contributions. If you are an academic working on the topic you are editing on Wikipedia, see also WP:EXPERT. In my opinion, WP:MEDMOS is less important than having a sourced pertinent content as the formatting can be fixed without any knowledge of the topic (and sometimes even automated) and thus takes much less time, I will personally be happy to fix the formatting for you as long as you provide reliably sourced content, but other editors might think otherwise and revert you for formatting mistakes.
Disputes are a normal part of the process of any collaborative project, and Wikipedia is unfortunately no exception. Despite the time you may take upon yourselves to make great contributions to Wikipedia, sometimes your contributions may get totally annihilated (ie, reverted).
In any case, try to remain calm and patient, follow WP:BRD and Wikipedia:Consensus#Through_discussion, remember that WP:PERFECTION is not required, and at worst follow WP:DISPUTE. If you think other editors may be WP:STONEWALLING you, don't fight back: the solution is to always to seek more editors opinions. You can do so by first asking for a WP:THIRDOPINION or directly ask on the closest WikiProject (such as Medical WikiProject), and if this doesn't work out, you can seek the dispute resolution noticeboard or another more pertinent noticeboard such as reliable sources noticeboard. As a last resort, you can open an RfC. If the other editor's behavior is the problem (eg, insults, threats), you can seek help from administrators at WP:ANI, but be warned that this last option can WP:BOOMERANG at you and get you banned, so make sure to always have WP:WIKILOVE behavior and avoid WP:KETTLE. Requesting the WP:ANI is often disadvised, the best if the situation is stalled is to drop the WP:STICK and work on other articles, away from the editors with whom you had issues. See also the sound advices here. Also post help requests in only exactly one of these avenues at a time, and wait at least 1 week without any reply before moving on to another avenue, as otherwise this could be considered forum shopping and get you banned.
Tip: if you come from a Wikipedia of another language, you should not assume that the rules are the same! For instance, warnings can be issued on your talk page by any user, not just admins, and even though they may be unjustified.
Always remember, and particularly in dire times, that we are all WP:HERE to build the sum of human knowledge Contributing to medical articles will become easier over time and experience
I wish you an enjoyable collaborative editing experience on Wikipedia full of WP:Wikilove! :-D
PS: of course, Wikipedia is far from perfect and has systemic biases[22][23], try to be patient and stick to WP:Wikilove, in the end things tend to get better :-)
Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC) |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | ||
for your random acts of kindness! - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 10:33, 3 October 2019 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | ||
This is for your valuable efforts on contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 16:26, 4 October 2019 (UTC) |
Please also see the wonderful heart-shaped WikiLove plugin[24] at the top right :-D For the very interesting rationale behind, see [25][26][27].
This section mainly describes concepts and links that are or have been of interest to me. In other words: this is a mess, although you may find some stuff to be of interest for yourself.
"Wikipedia has changed from 'the encyclopedia that anyone can edit' to 'the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes him or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi-automated rejection and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit.'"[31]
highlighted text with ((tq))
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. |
References
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. |
Case | Created | Last volunteer edit | Last modified | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Title | Status | User | Time | User | Time | User | Time |
trap-neuter-return | New | Nylnoj (t) | 16 days, 2 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 15 days, 18 hours | Nylnoj (t) | 13 days, 22 hours |
Mainstreet Research | Closed | Ontlib20 (t) | 16 days, | Robert McClenon (t) | 10 days, 19 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 10 days, 19 hours |
California High-Speed Rail | Closed | Robert92107 (t) | 14 days, 2 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 9 days, 7 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 9 days, 7 hours |
Climate change | In Progress | InformationToKnowledge (t) | 11 days, 13 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 19 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 19 hours |
Elihu Yale | In Progress | Academia45 (t) | 11 days, | Robert McClenon (t) | 19 hours | Desertarun (t) | 8 hours |
List of 2023–24 Premiership Rugby transfers | Closed | LouisOrr27 (t) | 8 days, 1 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 8 days, | Robert McClenon (t) | 8 days, |
Seamus Heaney | Resolved | Thedarkknightli (t) | 6 days, 5 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 4 days, 19 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 4 days, 19 hours |
Morocco | Closed | NAADAAN (t) | 5 days, 2 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 4 days, 18 hours | Robert McClenon (t) | 4 days, 18 hours |
If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put ((DRN case status)) on your page. Click on that link for more options.
Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 18:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
To get notifications, register at WP:FRS or check manually WP:RFC/All. For me: