Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Collaboration of the Week

Every week, a Medicine Collaboration of the Week will be selected using this page. The article may or may not yet exist. The topics may either relate to medical basic sciences (anatomy, biochemistry, and so on), or clinical medicine (illnesses, surgical procedures, and so on). The aim is to have a featured-standard article by the end of the period through widespread cooperative editing. This collaboration is part of the WikiProject Medicine project.

	The current Medicine Collaboration of the Week is Ascending cholangitis.
	Last week's collaboration was Physiotherapy.

The project aims to fill gaps in Wikipedia, to give users a focus and to give us all something to be proud of. Any registered user can nominate and vote on articles (see Voting below). This collaboration uses approval voting. You do not have to be involved in the field of medicine to participate; the opinion of laypeople is valued both for article suggestions and to help ensure that articles are not too technical. New articles will be selected every Wednesday (see the record of previous collaborations). This collaboration is still new; rules may change or be bent as we find our footing.

For individuals wishing to notify others of articles being created or for which they seeking collaborators, or ask for completed pages to be peer-reviewed, please see the project's talk page.

Contents 1 Voting 1.1 List of past and present maintainers 2 Nominations 3 Nominations for the next MCOTW 3.1 Placebo 3.2 Medicine 3.3 Heart failure 3.4 Thrombosis 3.5 Blood-brain barrier 3.6 Medical prescription 3.7 Subcutaneous emphysema 3.8 Lymphatic system 4 Participants 5 Tools

[edit] Voting

Please vote in favor of as many candidates as you like; oppose votes have no effect (approval voting is used). Any registered user may vote for an article, provided that account's first edit occurred before the nomination. You do not have to have any special knowledge of medicine to nominate or vote for an article. To vote for an article, simply edit the appropriate section and add # ~~~~. If you believe that a topic does not fall within the scope of this project, please mention your objections in the "Comments" section. Every Wednesday, the article currently with the most votes will be selected to be the new collaboration, although collaborations may be extended from time to time (for instance, during featured article candidacy). In the case of a tie, the article nominated first will be selected. Articles not selected must receive at least two votes per week to remain in consideration. If a nomination fails to achieve sufficient votes, it may be renominated after at least two weeks. You may wish to see the archive of successful nominations.

[edit] List of past and present maintainers

1. Knowledge Seeker, founder, July 2005
2. JFW, August 2007 to present
3. NCurse, June 2006 to present

[edit] Nominations

Nominations may be made at any time. Nominators must be registered users. To make a nomination, follow the following steps:

1. Edit the list of nominations and paste the following text at the bottom: {{subst:MCOTWnew|article name|~~~~~|your reason for nominating|~~~~}}.
2. Change the text accordingly (for example, {{subst:MCOTWnew|Histiocytosis X|~~~~~|August 2, 2005|It has an "X" in its name.|~~~~}}).
3. Please add {{MCOTWnom}} to the top of the article's talk page.

The next MCOTW will be chosen on June 26, 2008.

[edit] Nominations for the next MCOTW

[edit] Placebo

Nominated at 18:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC).

This article is a rambling, out-of-date treatise that can and should give clearer information about--for example--the placebo effect in response treatments as diverse as high quality evidence-based medicine to medical quackery, why placebo controls are necessary for a quality study, and the known and suspected mechanisms involved.

Support

1. — Scientizzle 18:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
2. — Enviropearson (talk) 03:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
3. LeeVJ (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments.

• This has also been proposed at the Pharmacology project. If chosen, it might be nice for both projects to coordinate its development. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
• This article is within the scope of Medicine(B Class), Psychology(Start Class), Philosophy(B Class), Rational Skepticism(B Class), Alternative Medicine(B Class) and Philosophy(Start Class). This is a great opportunity for cross-disciplinary collaboration. -Enviropearson (talk) 03:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
• I think it is pointless if one WikiProject starts working on this without the input of the others. If elected, I would suggest posting messages on the other WikiProjects' talk pages to engage their members. JFW | T@lk 11:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

On reflection of this I have come up with a proposal for Queued articles on the discussion page, LeeVJ (talk) 00:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Medicine

Nominated at 12:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC).

An article of vital importance according to WP:WP1 and this projects namesake! Has been a MCOTW a few years ago, but is still B-class

Support

1. LeeVJ (talk) 12:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
2. Eleassar ^{my talk} 16:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC) The article is quite biased as it describes only curative medicine and almost completely neglects other modern and important paradigms, like community medicine, preemptive measures and public health endeavors.

Comments

[edit] Heart failure

Nominated at 09:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC).

Presently a B-class article with some pressing needs in the "pathophysiology" section. Regarded as a no-hope in the past, now highly treatable with a large number of treatment options; could become a GA if updated properly.

Support

1. JFW | T@lk 09:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
2. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 22:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

[edit] Thrombosis

Nominated at 05:41, 14 06 2008

A fairly large topic within the medical community but insufficiently explained on Wikipedia. No references, largely incomplete. Enough information is available from external, reliable resources to turn this into a B-Class or GA given enough attention.

Support

1. CycloneNimrod (talk) 20:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
2. JFW | T@lk 22:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
3. LeeVJ (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Care will need to be taken to avoid overlap with deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and related pages. Also, arterial and venous thrombosis are now generally regarded as rather different disease processes, so we may well end up turning this into something akin to a disambiguation page. JFW | T@lk 22:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blood-brain barrier

Nominated at 05:41, Saturday June 14, 2008 (UTC)

Important article regarding both medicine and pharmacy, IMHO. It's got a good basis and a lot of information, just needs to be cleaned and cited a lot more.

Support

1. Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 16:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
2. JFW | T@lk 06:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• We ought to do a basic science article for a change. JFW | T@lk 06:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Medical prescription

Nominated at 05:41, Saturday June 14, 2008 (UTC)

It's a very important topic, and the article's only in so-so shape. Most of the information is heavily skewed towards the US. It includes a couple of screenfuls of original source materials (US laws and regulations) as "exhibits". Ideally, MCOTW could be timed for an inter-project collaboration with our friends at the Pharmacology project.

Support

1. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• This would be pointless without involvement from WP:PHARM. JFW | T@lk 12:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Subcutaneous emphysema

Nominated at 05:41, Saturday June 14, 2008 (UTC)

Recent GA, failed FA article. Needs just one or two weeks of solid improvement of references (as most are case reviews and not review articles). Jargon needs explaining, other than that, it's pretty well rounded. I know it's not a desperate case but I think it's worth doing.

Support

1. Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 08:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• I'm not sure if it's references that are needed. JFW | T@lk 12:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

• In what way exactly? Something else needs doing or the references are okay? I can't sense sarcasm on the internet, it's a shame! :) Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 22:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

• The references seem fine. I can't see evidence of it failing FA. I understand your point about references, and support the need for reviews over case series, but in this particular instance no such reviews may be available. This URL will take you to all papers with SCE as a MAJR heading. Of the 35 review articles, none are of the comprehensive type that we so prefer for WP:MEDRS. JFW | T@lk 11:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lymphatic system

Nominated at 19:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC).

I feel the article lymphatic system, and all the articles related to it are in a very bad shape. There are very few citations, the articles are almost discontinuous with each other, so much so that they don't seem to be representing the same organ system. Needless, to say this is a very fundamental topic in medicine, in which sometimes even medical students (in my experience, at least) have insufficient knowledge or misconceptions.

In my message to JFW, I conveyed to him that these articles need attention almost on an "emergency basis" if there's such a provision. —KetanPanchal^taLK 19:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. —KetanPanchal^taLK 19:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
2. Regards, CycloneNimrod ^talk?_contribs? 19:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
3. JFW | T@lk 11:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
4. Ziphon (^ALL_ears) 03:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
5. I agree. Jamie^☆S93 16:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• There are no medical emergencies on Wikipedia, but I'm sure that a sufficient number of votes will lead to this article (and related material) being pushed to MCOTW. JFW | T@lk 11:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Participants

Please note your interest in this collaboration at Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Participants. (Those who were listed here previously were moved to that list.)

Collaborations
Core topics Biography
Arts & entertainment
Alternative Music James Bond Novels
Games & sports
Baseball Professional wrestling Rugby union
Geography & places
Australia India Peru
Government & politics
Taxation U.S. Congress
Religion
Anglicanism Catholic
Education
Universities
Science & technology
Birds Mammals Mathematics Medicine Molecular and Cellular Biology Plants NEW! Pharmacology Robotics NEW! Science Space U.S. Roads
Miscellaneous
Inactive collaborations v • d • e

[edit] Tools

• /History — record of previous collaborations
• /Successful nominations
• /Expired nominations

{{CurrentMCOTW}} is the banner for the current collaboration. You may wish to place it on your user or talk page.

{{MCOTWnom}} is placed on the talk pages of articles currently being considered for MCOTW. It places articles in Category:MCOTW candidates.

{{MCOTWcur}} is for the current collaboration article. While it is currently being placed at the top of articles, its placement has not been finalized. It may go on the article and/or talk page.

{{MCOTWprev}} is for articles previously selected as the collaboration of the week.

{{MCOTWnew}} sets up new nominations. It should always be substituted.

{{MCOTWthanks}} thanks voters for the support.