Leevanjackson

Hello

HD article

Hi Lee Van, You may have noticed my somewhat random postings on the HD talk page, and that I put Huntington's original "On Chorea" on Wikisource. The reason for my interest is that I have a just given a lecture on HD to a group of specialists, as part of a clinical presentation of "interesting cases" (HD patients with chronic intractable pain). The talk belongs to me, and was given with no intention of publishing it elsewhere, as it is no more than a review of the clinical presentation, pathology, treatment difficulties and possible future treatments for HD - suitable for a medical newspaper or refresher course, but not the stuff one publishes in journals. So apart from the specific clinical patient descriptions, it is not "original work", but it still represents many hours and days spent researching the literature to develop a talk that would stand up to peer criticism (as is the nature of these talks!). It seems a bit silly for me to hang on to stuff which has no further use for me, apart from possibly being reworked for a future talk. You seem to be most active at the HD article. Where do you think would be most appropriate to post the (edited) parts of the talk the way I wrote it? My thoughts are:

• While the format of the article is quite similar to the WP article (and indeed to most reviews, which I no doubt followed, consciously or not!), it differs sufficiently to be thought of as a whole new article. It would be arrogant of me to do that, and probably counter-productive.
• The HD talk page does not seem appropriate for the whole presentation to be posted.
• My style and order of presentation is different from the article as it is, and the _target audience was quite different. Some aspects (like symptoms and signs) I have approached quite differently, possibly too detailed for WP use.
• I try to reference every fact, which may lead to very long lists of refs. In the WP edited version this would be aggravated by the problem that many of my statements were illustrated by reference to actual cases, as opposed to literature descriptions, the former being excluded form WP use. Similarly, my own management recommendations would disqualify their use, being "original work" or "opinion". I would need to add or change refs there.

Should I place it on my user|talk page and ask for comments, or on the HD discussion page, section by section? Is there a separate place where collaborators collaborate, where the "suggested change" or "different writing" can be presented - specifically for the "collaboration of the week"? I would appreciate feedback by user page or e-mail. Regards, --Seejyb 20:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Medical Genetics WikiProject

Anybody can post news, announcements. Welcome in the team! :) If you need any help regarding the projects' templates, just let me know. NCurse _work 14:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

SCOTM

You voted for and this article is now the current Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article.

NCurse _work 05:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

News Update: Medical Genetics Wikiproject article assesment

One of the tasks of the WP:MEDGENP is to assess all unrated articles listed on the article rating page so that the quality of the articles within the scope of the project can be seen at a glance. This was previously updated only manually, but now the ratings are also harvested daily by a bot and the results posted here, with significant changes from the previous rating listed here. If you would like to assess an article relating to genetic disorders you can add the relevant template to the article talk page, which will add the article to the relevant category and will be monitored by the bot.

A new assessment category {{GA-Class}} (Good Article) has been added for articles that have been assessed as a Good Article.

There is also a new category Category:Acquired genetic disorders for genetic disorders that are not inherited. Please add this category to any articles you think may qualify.

If you are registered to use the AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) (requires Windows 2000/XP + .NET framework v.2) there is a Wikipedia Assessments plugin that is designed to make the assessment process faster and easier (about the plugin / user guide). It has an assessments mode, for reviewing articles, and a talk page tagging mode for reviewing articles. Users with more than 500 mainspace edits can register to use the AWB.

Medicine Collaboration of the Week

NCurse _work 13:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hdalogo2.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hdalogo2.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 15:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Medicine Collaboration of the Fortnight

NCurse _work 19:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Medicine Collaboration of the Fortnight

NCurse _work 16:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

On Dysphagia

You reverted the notification on the top of the article about the misuse of Dysphagia in the article. Please discuss why you did that in the talk page. Stephen Holland, M.D. Kd4ttc (talk) 02:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• will do - it looked like vandalism at first glance

Wikipedia:WikiProject Medical Genetics

I'm so glad to see you again! Could we revitalize the project? :) NCurse _work 18:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hello! was never really away - and have net access in all locations I stay in now! :) What do you suggest - I have been noticing the cellular biology has been expanding and now covers a number of subjects we originally had in genetics and a protein/ gene box semi-bot doing it's rounds, so wasn't too worried about actual; content and accuracy relating to genetics was on the ebb. Do you think we should rationalise subjects covered to be more specialised or continue expansion making closer links with crossover projects, or both--Leevanjackson (talk) 18:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)