User talk:Academia salad

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Srleffler 03:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Photobiomodulation

Thanks for your reply. Communicating through user talk pages is fine, although if a discussion relates to a specific article it is often better to discuss it on that article's talk page, so others who are interested can participate. I will copy your reply to talk:photobiomodulation and reply there, since I'm clearly not the only one who had this concern.

The how do you know if I respond depends. In this case, I am replying on your talk page, so you will get a notice from the software that the reply is here. For discussions on article talk pages, if you add the article to your watchlist by clicking the "watch" tab at the top, then all changes to the article and its talk page will show up on your watchlist. You can view your watchlist by clicking "my watchlist" at the top right of the screen, when you are logged in. This is a good way to keep up with changes to your favorite article. If you are going to have an extended conversation with another user, you can also Watch that user and then initiate the discussion on his/her talk page. Then you can both reply in one place, so the discussion is easy to follow.--Srleffler 23:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

citation bots

Hello, Academia salad,

I saw you were having some troubles with ref formats. Here's the tool that will format PMID number into a full citation,

http://toolserver.org/~holek/cite-gen/

Also, normally one could use 'Cite pmid' template here,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite_pmid

but apparently the bot isn't working now.

All the best, --Dyuku (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Academia salad. You have new messages at WLU's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

License tagging for File:LED-LLLT-treatment-osteoarthritis-knee.png

Thanks for uploading File:LED-LLLT-treatment-osteoarthritis-knee.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Laser-LLLT-treatment-neck-pain.png

Thanks for uploading File:Laser-LLLT-treatment-neck-pain.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:06, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

LED treatment for osteoarthritis

Is this appropriate for LLLT page? Isn't LED different from LLLT? --Dyuku (talk) 04:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Userpage

Hi Academia salad. Thanks for the disclosure of your financial conflict on your userpage. Would you please quickly review WP:USERPAGE? Briefly it is not OK to use your userpage to create a mini article about yourself nor to promote yourself. Disclosing your real world identity was entirely optional (that decision has been made of course).

Something like: "I am James D Carroll, Founder and CEO at THOR Photomedicine Ltd. and an engineer. I am an expert on low level laser therapy and I have a conflict of interest on related topics via my company"

The rest, including "A recognised authority and much published author on Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT)" and what follows, is not OK at all and is more or less offensive in the culture here. Would you please fix your userpage? thx Jytdog (talk) 14:26, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Changes made as per your recommendation. Thank you for the help. Academia salad (talk) 14:44, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 05:02, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I was looking at this user page and I noticed they have a list of papers they have contributed to. Would this be ok for me to do? Or is it different for me because of COI? Academia salad (talk) 11:07, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Academia salad. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing, which is mostly about health and medicine. Thanks for disclosing your relationship with Thor.

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

We look for disclosure at the userpage and locally at the talk pages of articles as well; I have gone ahead and added the "connected contributor" tag to the relevant talk pages. So disclosure is done for now.

The second piece is a form of peer review; I am sure you are familiar with that from your scientific work. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. And no author at the top of the page, so that readers know who wrote an article, and can read the article in light of who the authors are and any COI disclosures they make, as in normal scientific publication. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article in Wikipedia. Conflicted editors tend to be driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to battles with other editors.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to

(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and

(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section, put the proposed content there, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) please the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review. In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once. Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example. This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines.

I have also added a "welcome" below from WikiProject Medicine, which provides a brief-as-possible overview of the guidelines for writing about health and medicine in WP (sourcing and style, are especially important - e.g. we don't discuss "patients" but rather "people")

Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 14:38, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog, thank you for all the information, I am happy to follow the peer-review process and to propose changes via the talk page to be reviewed, discussed and to ensure the page is as neutral as possible. Academia salad (talk) 14:53, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

based on other stuff you have written, that is what i was figuring you would say. :) Thanks for being so reasonable. Jytdog (talk) 05:02, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia and Wikiproject Medicine

Welcome to Wikipedia! We have compiled some guidance for healthcare editors:

1. Please keep the mission of Wikipedia in mind. We provide the public with accepted knowledge, working in a community.
2. We do that by finding high quality secondary sources and summarizing what they say, giving WP:WEIGHT as they do. Please do not try to build content by synthesizing content based on primary sources. (For the difference between primary and secondary sources, see WP:MEDDEF.)
3. Please use high-quality, recent, secondary sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS). High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed. Please beware of predatory publishers – check the publishers of articles (especially open source articles) at Beall's list.
4. The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS. The section above the table of contents is called the WP:LEAD. It summarizes the body. Do not add anything to the lead that is not in the body. Style is covered in MEDMOS as well; we avoid the word "patient" for example.
5. More generally see WP:MEDHOW
6. Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
7. We use very few capital letters and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
8. Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities.
9. Please include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article.
10. Please format citations consistently within an article and be sure to cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books; see WP:MEDHOW for how to format citations.
11. Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
12. Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us!

– the WikiProject Medicine team