User:Biosthmors/Bugs
- My editing philosophy:
Welcome to my Wikipedia user page. My real name isn't "Biosthmors", which is just a rearrangment of the letters in the word thrombosis. I edit Wikipedia and
If you want check my edits to see if I am slanting any article towards any point of view, I'll explain some of my beliefs: I see
As for other groups of people around the world, I think all the faces here are attractive (well except for one). As for other sentient beings, I think dolphins and whales should have human rights (unless you're an Inuit hunting with pre-Industrial Revolution tools). Why do I bother mentioning all of this? Because I want you to know that I see editing Wikipedia as one method we might take more responsibility for the world around us—and as an effect, improve social and environmental health.
My other Wikipedia–WMF views are as follows: I am strongly pro-paid editing and strongly
I care about this politicoeconomical influence because I think it limits the options available for effective governance of the WMF. Wikipedia is in a crisis. It has previously fallen on Alexa page rankings from #5 to #8. We need good governance, oversight, and effective investment of community resources to end the crisis. We should try to be the the world's #1 internet destination. Also, I wish the WMF would publish metrics similar to what Alexa uses, like bounce rate, daily page views per visitor, and daily time on site. What are the historical trends on those numbers?
Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit—not the encyclopedia you can abuse to force anyone to edit. Therefore, I feel that the WMF should never influence instructors to force students to edit other than inside Wikipedia sandboxes. Unskilled, uninformed, and untrained students being forced by ignorant instructors to edit Wikipedia articles is one of the worst things about the education program. In my opinion, this forced editing results from the WMF using a bad metric: quantity. However, a quantity-focused approach is not how the English Wikipedia developed—nor is it what the community wants—so pursuing this strategy to build the encyclopedia in English or any other language seems very ill-advised.
- My potential conflicts of interest:
- I have an interest in Vanguard and in the performance of VTSMX and VGTSX with an eye towards increasing shareholder value (and dividend payments) for corporations in those indecies, which might involve the reduction of executive pay
- Groups I appreciate include the Sunlight Foundation, Transparency International, and Amnesty International; if these groups have their way, they might reduce some level of shareholder value (please note the apparent contradiction with the first bullet point)
- I have a potential conflict of interest with the topic Suburban Express, but not a real one, because all I want is for the wise application of NPOV and RS to win out
- I want the Democratic party to win the Senate seat in the 2014 Georgia election because I still think what Saxby Chambliss did to Max Clelandwas despicable
- I support abolishing the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration because I see drug abuse, not drug use, as a social and medical problem—not a criminal problem. The U.S. government should not outlaw anyone's personal freedom as they do currently. Why should they?[2] I support the Portuguese model. I find the viewpoint of some U.S. "conservatives", those who believe that they know what God wants politicians and the government to do, to be highly flawed. I feel that that religiopolitical ideology might be best classified as a disease.
- "Reported" bug/feature requests:
- To report bug/feature requests:
- crawl ),
- References
8 June 2024 |
Things going on with WikiProject Medicine articles
Did you know
- 16 Jun 2024 – Oen Boen Ing (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Crisco 1492 (t · c); see discussion
- 09 Jun 2024 – Walter W. White (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by B3251 (t · c); see discussion
- 05 Jun 2024 – Esther Tailfeathers (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Valereee (t · c); see discussion
- 04 Jun 2024 – List of individual body parts (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Gobonobo (t · c); see discussion
- 28 May 2024 – Paul Parkman (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Thriley (t · c); see discussion
- 19 May 2024 – Guardian Cap (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Soulbust (t · c); see discussion
- 09 May 2024 – Adnan al-Bursh (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Makeandtoss (t · c); see discussion
- 07 May 2024 – Laura Veale (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Storye book (t · c); see discussion
Articles for deletion
- 21 Jun 2024 – Medical professional misconduct scandals in Nova Scotia (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by JFHJr (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
- 20 Jun 2024 – Temple University School of Podiatric Medicine (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by HyperAccelerated (t · c); see discussion (4 participants)
- 17 Jun 2024 – Carl Faingold (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Lindsey40186 (t · c); see discussion (4 participants; relisted)
- 12 Jun 2024 – Lybrate (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Lordofhunter (t · c); see discussion (2 participants; relisted)
- 15 Jun 2024 – United Nations drug control conventions (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Teluobir (t · c) was closed as keep by Cocobb8 (t · c) on 22 Jun 2024; see discussion (9 participants)
Proposed deletions
- 20 Jun 2024 – Western University College of Podiatric Medicine (talk · edit · hist) was PRODed by HyperAccelerated (t · c): concern
- 20 Jun 2024 – California School of Podiatric Medicine (talk · edit · hist) was PRODed by HyperAccelerated (t · c): concern
- 20 Jun 2024 – Barry University School of Podiatric Medicine (talk · edit · hist) PRODed by HyperAccelerated (t · c) was redirected to Barry University (talk · edit · hist)
- 20 Jun 2024 – Temple University School of Podiatric Medicine (talk · edit · hist) PRODed by HyperAccelerated (t · c) was deproded by GB fan (t · c) on 20 Jun 2024
- 12 Jun 2024 – Institute of Health Sciences (Ireland) (talk · edit · hist) PRODed by Guliolopez (t · c) and endorsed by SeoR (t · c) on 12 Jun 2024 was deleted
Categories for discussion
- 25 Jun 2024 – Category:Male wartime nurses (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Smasongarrison (t · c); see discussion
- 30 May 2024 – Category:People on the autism spectrum (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by MikutoH (t · c); see discussion
- 17 Jun 2024 – Category:Plague doctor (talk · edit · hist) CfDed by Smasongarrison (t · c) was closed; see discussion
- 15 Jun 2024 – Category:American physicians by ethnic or national origin (talk · edit · hist) CfDed by LaundryPizza03 (t · c) was closed; see discussion
- 15 Jun 2024 – Category:People with substance use disorder (talk · edit · hist) CfDed by ScottishFinnishRadish (t · c) was closed; see discussion
Redirects for discussion
- 23 Jun 2024 – The lockdowns (talk · edit · hist) →COVID-19 lockdowns was RfDed by Sdrqaz (t · c); see discussion
- 19 Jun 2024 – Anabaptist Healthshare (talk · edit · hist) →Health care sharing ministry was RfDed by JalenFolf (t · c); see discussion
- 17 Jun 2024 –
- 17 Jun 2024 –
- 17 Jun 2024 –
Featured article candidates
- 17 May 2024 – John Rolph (talk · edit · hist) was FA nominated by Z1720 (t · c); see discussion
Good article nominees
- 17 Jun 2024 – The First Fallen (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by GnocchiFan (t · c); start discussion
- 09 Jun 2024 – Walter W. White (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by B3251 (t · c); start discussion
- 24 Apr 2024 – Exhaustion disorder (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Draken Bowser (t · c); see discussion
- 16 Apr 2024 – Alexander Langmuir (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by BluePenguin18 (t · c); see discussion
- 28 Mar 2024 – Adrenal crisis (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (t · c); see discussion
Featured article reviews
- 16 Jun 2024 – Helium (talk · edit · hist) was put up for FA review by Real4jyy (t · c); see discussion
Good article reassessments
- 23 Jun 2024 – Xinxiu bencao (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for GA reassessment by Kzyx (t · c); see discussion
Requests for comments
- 02 Jun 2024 – Circumcision (talk · edit · hist) has an RfC by Prcc27 (t · c); see discussion
Peer reviews
- 16 Jun 2024 – Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (talk · edit · hist) has been put up for PR by Femke (t · c); see discussion
Requested moves
- 23 Jun 2024 – Promotion of anorexia (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Pro-ana subculture by Queen of Hearts (t · c); see discussion
- 18 Jun 2024 – discussion
- 04 Jun 2024 – Sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Sexual violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel by TRCRF22 (t · c); see discussion
- 13 Jun 2024 – discussion
- 12 Jun 2024 – Mary Fletcher (talk · edit · hist) move request to Mary Fletcher (philanthropist) by SafariScribe (t · c) was closed; see discussion
Articles to be merged
- 24 Jun 2024 – Somatization disorder (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Somatic symptom disorder by CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (t · c); see discussion
- 07 Jun 2024 – Microneedles (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Microneedle drug delivery by Klbrain (t · c); see discussion
- 05 Jun 2024 – Hematochezia (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to blood in stool by Tobiasi0 (t · c); see discussion
- 05 Jun 2024 – Precision cut lung slices (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Precision cut tissue slices by Beland (t · c); see discussion
- 31 May 2024 – Stomach reduction surgery (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Bariatric surgery by Boghog (t · c); see discussion
- 29 May 2024 – Human Chimerism (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Human chimera by Jlwoodwa (t · c); see discussion
- 29 May 2024 – Drugs and sexual performance (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Sex and drugs by 1233 (t · c); see discussion
- 18 May 2024 – Olivopontocerebellar atrophy (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Multiple system atrophy by Fayenatic london (t · c); see discussion
- 07 May 2024 –
- 28 Apr 2024 – Respiratory quotient (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Respiratory exchange ratio by Klbrain (t · c); see discussion
- (21 more...)
Articles to be split
- 22 Apr 2024 – State health agency (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by GobsPint (t · c); see discussion
- 20 Apr 2024 – Health department (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by GobsPint (t · c); see discussion
- 28 Mar 2024 – United Network for Organ Sharing (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by 45.26.61.142 (t · c); see discussion
- 03 Jan 2024 – Anisakis (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Artoria2e5 (t · c); see discussion
- 17 Nov 2023 – Mycoplasma (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Artoria2e5 (t · c); see discussion
- 27 May 2023 – Health advocacy (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Felix QW (t · c); see discussion
- 31 Mar 2023 – Range of motion (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Urbourbo (t · c); see discussion
- 02 Oct 2022 – Soft diet (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by AngusWOOF (t · c); see discussion
- 04 Jan 2022 – Arthur Neve (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Breamk (t · c); see discussion
- 11 Dec 2021 – Care UK (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Djm-leighpark (t · c); see discussion
- (4 more...)
Articles for creation
- 24 Jun 2024 – Draft:Robert W. Amler (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Jrodriguezrentas (t · c)
- 19 Jun 2024 – Draft:Society for Equity Neuroscience (SEQUINS) (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by 2601:645:E82:23D0:EC1C:1471:6CA0:E90E (t · c)
- 18 Jun 2024 – Draft:Splenorenal recess (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Gottbrainz (t · c)
- 17 Jun 2024 – Draft:Mark Kotter (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Damjana12 (t · c)
- 16 Jun 2024 – Draft:Brad Feuer (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Salish Amerind (t · c)
- 16 Jun 2024 – Draft:Mohammad Arif Hossain (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Sadakathosen (t · c)
- 12 Jun 2024 – Draft:Anand Reddi (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Trex32 (t · c)
- 11 Jun 2024 – Draft:International Wrist Arthroscopy Society (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Aviancaramp (t · c)
- 10 Jun 2024 – Draft:Jose Wiley (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Cryptic Keyboarder (t · c)
- 09 Jun 2024 – Draft:Charles Malden Oman (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by OkcuhC (t · c)
- (65 more...)
Medical articles up for deltion
Medicine
Medical professional misconduct scandals in Nova Scotia
- Medical professional misconduct scandals in Nova Scotia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Another referral from
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, and Canada. JFHJr (㊟) 01:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- How are scandals that involve serious breaches of public trust on multiple occasions (e.g. Dalhousie Dentistry scandal, multiple privacy breaches) and 6-7 figure lawsuit payouts not notable? One of the bullying scandals even led the victim to making a TEDx talk about workplace bullying:
- https://www.ted.com/talks/gabrielle_horne_how_a_doctor_used_medical_research_tools_to_survive_workplace_bullying?language=en
- If the title needs to be changed, that's one thing. Or making it a "list article", whatever that means. But I don't agree that the scandals are not independently notable. And they are related - several of them raise that there are systemic issues that recur, for example:
- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/dalhousie-medical-school-mistreatment-harassment-bullying-1.6712113
- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/medical-resident-mistreatment-study-dalhousie-1.7058488
- And others as referenced. Feel free to read the original news articles in detail, if I perhaps did not summarize them well, but I definitely see them pointing to systemic issues repeatedly - the articles themselves, not me as doing "original research and synthesis".
- As a new editor on Wikipedia, getting excited about making an article about all the medical scandals in our province and the toxic workplace issues that we all hear about the medical system all the time, and being shut down quite harshly repeatedly instead of welcomed and kindly shown how to refine things, I am so demoralized that I'm frankly just done with editing. No point if this is what this community is like.
- MrHaligonian (talk) 02:03, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Hello MrHaligonian, and welcome. You, me and everyone else are compelled by the original research, which is disallowed. Draken Bowser (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- and per Fram. Draken Bowser (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- WP:CONTENTSPLIT the article in two. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for taking the time to read the sources and come up with a creative idea that allows my hard work to be kept. I agree with you that it's mostly Dalhousie University problems, because as far as I can tell, everything that happened at Nova Scotia Health Authority also happened at Dalhousie University as all were employed as trainees (medical students, residents, fellows) at Dalhousie, or they were doing research there. The only part that has nothing to do with Dalhousie is the part about repeated privacy breaches, as the news media only says it was healthcare professionals looking at hundreds of records that they weren't authorized to, and the lawsuit had NSHA pay out $1 million with a new lawsuit & allegations of negligence as of last month. I would be good with having the majority of the sources moved into a Dalhousie University article by someone who knows how to write this better/quote the sources better (maybe you, Darkfrog24) and I don't know what to do with the NSHA-only parts.
- For the record, I originally had another section on private practice scandals that someone felt violates BLP so it was removed. That further pigeonholes this article into being mostly about Dalhousie and less about the whole of Nova Scotia. MrHaligonian (talk) 12:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- as far as I can tell,
- There's your kicker. It's not about what you can tell or what I can tell. It's about what professionally published sources can tell. The article has sources that say "medical scandals are a specific thing in Dalhousie" and "medical scandals are a specific thing in the Health Authority," but it's WP:ORIGINALRESEARCHto add that together as yourself-the-Wikieditor and say "therefore they're a thing in Nova Scotia." Even if you are a professional investigator of this specific issue IRL, you have to wait for a pro to publish. That's true throughout project Wiki: Chemists aren't allowed to write chemistry articles without sources even though they're experts. Historians aren't allowed to write history articles without sources even though they're experts. We all need sources, and those sources have to say the thing that the article says or strongly implies.
- My first article got deleted too. I've since gone on to make many more. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- The kind of source you'd need for "Medical professional misconduct scandals in Nova Scotia" would be something like a newspaper article analyzing multiple scandals and talking about what it is about Nova Scotia specifically that made them happen or made them happen the way they did. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Ah I see, thank you. It is possible such an article exists and I just haven't found it yet. I did find, in another search, 4 more articles about serious scandals in Nova Scotia Health Authority. So this would provide more material for an NSHA article if we were to proceed with splitting a Dalhousie University medical scandals article off from an NSHA article:
- https://ca.news.yahoo.com/nova-scotia-medical-mistakes-registry-085610510.html
- https://globalnews.ca/news/10318288/pictou-landing-first-nation-accuse-radiologists-secret-tests/
- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ambulance-service-emc-ehs-health-emergency-1.7131333
- https://globalnews.ca/news/9396989/allison-holthoff-er-death-cumberland-regional-health-centre-ns/
- I think the entirety of my article up to, and NOT including, my last paragraph about privacy breaches, can be transitioned to a DU-specific article, since everyone in the paragraphs above the NSHA privacy breaches were training or doing research at DU and DU is therefore significantly involved even if NSHA ended up being the one getting sued. For example, the Dr. Horne case involved her doing research at DU and older colleagues demanded to receive undue credit on her research, which is very much a DU culture problem, but NSHA suspended her privileges so it was NSHA that got sued. The fact of toxic culture issues at DU remain in that case though, along with all the other cases where DU was involved. I am actually now starting to realize that the toxic culture issues are primarily a DU problem, and NSHA problems are of a different nature entirely, more along the lines of disregard for privacy and medical mistakes, rather than being a "toxic workplace" issue. My goal with this article was to primarily comment on toxic workplace issues because that's what we constantly hear about from medical professionals in this province.
- So I'm thinking to split the articles into 2:
- 1. Dalhousie University Medical Scandals (or some such name to refer to the toxic workplace issues that repeatedly recur) and
- 2. Nova Scotia Health Authority Scandals (referring to the privacy/medical errors type of issues) MrHaligonian (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- As this relates to article deletion, I think we can all take this as evidence that there is a Wikieditor willing to do the legwork. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've edited the article accordingly to prep it for a potential content split. MrHaligonian (talk) 00:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've edited the article accordingly to prep it for a potential content split.
- As this relates to article deletion, I think we can all take this as evidence that there is a Wikieditor willing to do the legwork. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The kind of source you'd need for "Medical professional misconduct scandals in Nova Scotia" would be something like a newspaper article analyzing multiple scandals and talking about what it is about Nova Scotia specifically that made them happen or made them happen the way they did. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or MrHaligonian (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I also wonder how to make it a "list article", so that it's basically a summarized list of all the scandals, instead of "original research" and "synthesis". I don't know what the criteria are for making it a list. As it stands now, with the opening sentences revised, I feel like this is just a list of scandals at Dalhousie, and a list of scandals at the provincial health authority, and both of those fall under the realm of "Nova Scotia". If it's considered "synthesis" to combine them in 1 then I understand the content split argument, though the 2 articles separated would be basically stubs, and also there is considerable overlap between the two as it's not possible for someone to be a medical trainee at Dalhousie without also being a Nova Scotia Health Authority employee, and most NSHA employees involved in the scandals were also training or doing research at Dalhousie. But the privacy breach scandals with a $1million class action lawsuit payout and a new class action lawsuit pending seem to have no link to Dalhousie. This is why I think it's good to have them both together under 1 article, but if it is "synthesis" to identify that Dalhousie and NSHA together fall under the umbrella of Nova Scotia, then I guess splitting is the only option... MrHaligonian (talk) 20:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- A list article requires discrete events to list that have articles (are ) 03:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- You're totally allowed to vote. You're what we call the "first major contributor" to the article. That means you get to set a few precedents for the article going forward, but other than that it's not treated as yours per se. (So you get to vote and aren't treated as inherently biased just for having made said contribution.) I like to think of it as as soon as I hit "publish changes," I've given the content to the Wiki as a present. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining, and I responded to your helpful explanation about synthesis above. MrHaligonian (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Your vote is allowed, welcomed, and reasoned (which is important, thank you!). You can also change it if you want, or add a "Strong" or "Weak" if you're feeling so. Decisions here are ultimately by ) 04:09, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining, and I responded to your helpful explanation about synthesis above.
- I also wonder how to make it a "list article", so that it's basically a summarized list of all the scandals, instead of "original research" and "synthesis". I don't know what the criteria are for making it a list. As it stands now, with the opening sentences revised, I feel like this is just a list of scandals at Dalhousie, and a list of scandals at the provincial health authority, and both of those fall under the realm of "Nova Scotia". If it's considered "synthesis" to combine them in 1 then I understand the content split argument, though the 2 articles separated would be basically stubs, and also there is considerable overlap between the two as it's not possible for someone to be a medical trainee at Dalhousie without also being a Nova Scotia Health Authority employee, and most NSHA employees involved in the scandals were also training or doing research at Dalhousie. But the privacy breach scandals with a $1million class action lawsuit payout and a new class action lawsuit pending seem to have no link to Dalhousie. This is why I think it's good to have them both together under 1 article, but if it is "synthesis" to identify that Dalhousie and NSHA together fall under the umbrella of Nova Scotia, then I guess splitting is the only option...
Temple University School of Podiatric Medicine
- Temple University School of Podiatric Medicine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Medicine, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:51, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect - to WP:ATD, we should merge or redirect to a related subject rather than delete if possible. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 15:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Temple U per ATD. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 23:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The only editor who was "notified" of this action [7] is an editor who's unable to either improve the article or participate in this discussion because the account was blocked sixteen years ago. Why didn't you notify any living editors, HyperAccelerated? Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- There is no provision for notifying any particular editor in WP: AFDHOWTO. Twinkle happens to notify the article's creator, and I use Twinkle for nominating articles for deletion. HyperAccelerated (talk) 22:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Then why notify anyone at all? And if you were going to notify just one editor, why choose a wiki-ghost? Yappy2bhere (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Twinkle happens to notify the article's creator, and I use Twinkle for nominating articles for deletion." HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I get it now. Notifying editors is a suggestion not a requirement, it wasn't your intent to notify article editors at all, but the tool insists on notifying the article's creator. Yappy2bhere (talk) 17:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Then why notify anyone at all? And if you were going to notify just one editor, why choose a wiki-ghost? Yappy2bhere (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- There is no provision for notifying any particular editor in
Carl Faingold
- Carl Faingold (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I've cleaned this article up a bit but after looking for additional information to add more substance, I don't think this meets
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Lindsey40186 (talk) 01:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Medicine, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NPROF#1. On GS I see at least 12 publications in GS with 100+ citations which is generally beyond the bar required to clear #1. Scopus lists him at an h-index of 44 with 10 publications with 100+ citations and Scopus is generally more conservative than GS. So based on this it seems like a pretty clear cut case for NPROF#1. --hroest10:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's a pretty gross misreading of WP: NPROF. It says "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." Nowhere does it say that h-index, citation count, or publication count is a factor for establishing notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:12, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- That's a pretty gross misreading of
- Delete: Author of quite a few books and peer-reviewed studies, but I don't find critical review of his books, nor any indication of the academic notability needed here. Oaktree b (talk) 13:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)- Delete: Fails WP: N. I can't find any sources to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Lybrate
- Lybrate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unable to find a news which is not a PR. Funding, launches, and announcements are all they have. Even the creator came only to create the page. Lordofhunter (talk) 04:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Companies. Lordofhunter (talk) 04:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, Internet, Software, and Delhi. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom. also look like an advertisement! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 16:54, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Surgery
Proposed deletions
An automatically generated list of proposed deletions and other medicine-related article alerts can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Article alerts, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology/Article alerts, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Neuroscience/Article alerts
Deletion Review
The Signpost
|