User talk:Vogon77

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Hello, "Vogon77" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

-- Infrogmation 03:12, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that several of your new articles are quite brief. Please add {{stub}} to short articles so that others can identify and contribute to articles that need fleshing out. --KSlayer 06:02, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)


Hi. Same message from me. PLEASE do not write such brief articles without adding the stub notice. In fact, this site discourages such substubs. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any further questions. - Lucky 6.9 01:16, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. PLEASE review Wikipedia:Manual of Style. RickK 07:49, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Hey Vogon77! Thanks for ongoing help on the medicine articles. Would you be interested to join the other Wikidoctors at WikiProject "Clinical medicine"? Here we exchange ideas and policy.

Concerning the categories: most medical articles do not fall under Category:Medicine, which would then become very very large. Instead, categories like Category:Neurology are children of the Medicine category. As long as a condition is part of the child category, it will not need to go in Category:Medicine.

(Also please note that the Pediatrics category is called Category:Paediatrics for some unknown reason...) Thanks and see you around. JFW | T@lk 14:02, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The medical categories are at present a bit messy. I have been creating the medical specialisms as subcats of medicine, but other people seem to like categorisation by pathophysiology (e.g. Lupus under autoimmune diseases). In fact, both are valid systems. Please have a look at the Category:Medicine and its subcategories. There is still a lot of work to be done... JFW | T@lk 12:01, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "textbook classification". Is this the classification by organ system, pathophysiology or etiology? At the moment, most articles are classified by organ system or medical specialty, and many also have a pathophysiological category (e.g. autoimmune diseases). JFW | T@lk 10:29, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Empty pages

Don't create empty pages. They will be speedy deleted. RickK 08:02, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

Please add the details before creating the articles. There have already been other users adding speedy deletion headers to your articles. RickK 08:06, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Headings

Hi Vogon77, my compliments on your recent work (Epiglottitis had not been written yet!). I would recommend against putting empty sections in articles, presuming that someone else will write them. If anything, you can also use HTML comment codes < !-- and -- > with the spaces removed. JFW | T@lk 13:04, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] Grammar!

Vogon77, my compliments on your dedicated work. You have patiently worked on a large number of subjects that nobody has yet managed to cover on Wikipedia.

Please do invest more time in making grammatically correct sentences. In Cushing ulcer, you inserted: "Also seen in the proximal duodenum and distal esophagus". While factually correct, the sentence lacks a subject (what is seen?) Other editors eventually tidy up these things, but it would be nicer if the article was linguistically tenable from the start. As I've told you before: my English has improved markedly from working on Wikipedia (it is not actually my first language).

Otherwise: keep up the good work! JFW | T@lk 16:19, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Redirects

Redirects use the following format:

#REDIRECT [[Other article]]

Brianjd 09:38, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

[edit] Content

Hi! Just a friendly note to let you know that an article that isn't much more than a single sentence that's obvious to the person doing the research is likely to be speedy deleted. The article you just did on that Indian actress is a good example. Three or four sentences would be a lot more useful and would guarantee that the article is kept in order that you might expand it later. Take care. - Lucky 6.9 23:15, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Manual of style

Hi Vogon77, thanks for doing all that endocrine work! Could you please adhere to the manual of style when making edits? This saves others the bother of having to improve the formatting of articles after you've edited them.

For example, articles start with an introduction, which is a few lines long and has no header. The headers themselves are on level 2 (==Header==) and are not capitalised apart from the first letter and proper names. Also, some additions could be a bit more prosaic, such as the note about the use of C-peptide in identifying abuse of hypoglycemics.

Thank you for your attention. JFW | T@lk 08:48, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

please refrain from repeated comments on manual of style. eventually things will be corrected vogon77 03:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I beg do differ. Indeed things will be corrected... by other editors who have to tidy up after you! If English is not your first language, it would be immensely helpful if you updated your knowledge of grammar and spelling. In the long term, articles look fairly clumsy if they have unedited loose bits of information that are presented without framework.

If you are uncertain how to phrase a certain point, there is always the talk page of an article where you can make suggestions.

Again, the knowledge you have added is extremely useful, but please spare your fellow editors the bother of having to format your work adequately. I'm also not sure if you did right to delete the comments by Lucky 6.9[1]. JFW | T@lk 05:38, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

well, i guess thats the end of it all. goodbye. I quit. vogon77 06:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

That would be a shame. JFW | T@lk 07:08, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Reasons to leave:

  1. excessive deleting of new articles by Lucky 6.9
  2. too much monitoring of what and how i add. RELAX.
  3. i believe that i have left articles in better shape than i found them. I do accept that some of my formatting was not upto the mark. Though that judgement has been too stringent at times. wikipedia is not a beautification program, its to make a alternative repository of information. I would not be too much bothered about formatting than adding information. and i dont think there are format problems in every thing i have done, and i have followed tham to a large extent as well vogon77
Please tell me which articles were deleted. You can ask him whether they actually met the criteria for speedy deletion. They can be undeleted if they were deleted without ground.
Thankfully people monitor what other people add. Otherwise all vandalism from less bona fide users would also go unnoticed.
I think presentation is important, especially where it does not take a lot of effort to write a grammatically correct sentence. You have indeed written several very good entries, which is one of the reasons why I'm trying to convince you to stay. I can talk to Lucky6.9 if you want. JFW | T@lk 09:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/o/g/User_talk%7EVogon77_e698.html"