> Let's not focus on what others are doing wrong, but improve on what we may
> be doing wrong - that's the only thing we have most influence on in
> changing.
Are there spot checks by professionals in medicine, or ways to flag often-read
pages for peer review? That seems like a way that experts
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Jane Darnell wrote:
> What I think is funny about this whole article and this email thread
> is that the quality of Wikipedia is not brought into relation with
> anything else. For example, I know that one of the main causes of
> death in the Netherlands today has
What I think is funny about this whole article and this email thread
is that the quality of Wikipedia is not brought into relation with
anything else. For example, I know that one of the main causes of
death in the Netherlands today has to do with improper dosages of
medicine, caused both by failur
2014-05-28 7:42 GMT+02:00 Nurunnaby Chowdhury :
> Thanks everyone. Last day when this news published i receive lots of phone
> call from our journalist friend. You know all journalist just check the
> news media. Not check details issue.
This news found is way also on Italian media:
http://www.cor
Thanks everyone. Last day when this news published i receive lots of phone
call from our journalist friend. You know all journalist just check the
news media. Not check details issue. So i start this thread.
If this news published various language it may negative sign for Wikipedia.
Because all are
That's a weird content architecture, right there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine_in_Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_physician
https://en.w
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteopathic_medicine_in_the_United_States
Osteopaths also have chiropractic training.
Take care, Amy
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On 05/27/2014 09:44 AM, Stevie Benton wrote:
> > American Osteopathic Association
>
> I'm not an expert
Hi Hasive,
I think we need to read again
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Medical_disclaimer
Jayanta
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Nathan wrote:
> FYI - Here is the previous thread on this list about this study / topic:
>
>
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/460
FYI - Here is the previous thread on this list about this study / topic:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/460005?do=post_view_threaded
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidel
Wikipedia discourages self diagnosis and treatment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Medical_disclaimer
And I think professionals are capable enough to verify the credibility of
the referred sources instead of blindly reading the articles.
Regards,
Jee
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:31 PM, La
Hello,
I am a participant in WikiProject Medicine on English Wikipedia and know
about this case. I also have talked to the researcher who published this
paper since its publication.
Lots of people have lots of objections to Wikipedia. In my opinion, the
study itself is correct for what it reports
Osteopathy is one of those “difficult” ones, where it does have some real
evidence to back it up - but in the UK certain practitioners make exceptional
and (hokum) claims.
The NHS recommends it for Lower Back Pain
(http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Osteopathy/Pages/Introduction.aspx, and
personally
Actually, "Don't diagnose yourself" is just generally good advice. Even if
the medical information you have is accurate, there might be other possible
causes or factors that need to be considered.
Internet information, Wikipedia or otherwise, might be a good place to get
things to ask your doctor
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 4:27 PM, geni wrote:
> On 27 May 2014 15:22, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>
> >
> > Ah, that explains it. :-)
> >
> > Regardless, "Don't diagnose yourself with Wikipedia" seems to be
> > infinitely good advice, regardless of any hyperbole about article
> accuracy!
> >
> >
>
On 27 May 2014 15:22, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>
> Ah, that explains it. :-)
>
> Regardless, "Don't diagnose yourself with Wikipedia" seems to be
> infinitely good advice, regardless of any hyperbole about article accuracy!
>
>
The problem is the number of doctors who use wikipedia.
--
geni
_
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Martijn Hoekstra <
martijnhoeks...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Marc A. Pelletier
> wrote:
>
> > On 05/27/2014 09:44 AM, Stevie Benton wrote:
> > > American Osteopathic Association
> >
> > I'm not an expert on the latest woo-woo, but isn't
On 05/27/2014 10:18 AM, Martijn Hoekstra wrote:
> From what I remember from it is that
> what is called Osteopathy in the UK isn't the same thing that's called
> Osteopathy in the US
Ah, that explains it. :-)
Regardless, "Don't diagnose yourself with Wikipedia" seems to be
infinitely good advice
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On 05/27/2014 09:44 AM, Stevie Benton wrote:
> > American Osteopathic Association
>
> I'm not an expert on the latest woo-woo, but isn't Osteopathy one of the
> numerous "faith-based 'medecine'"?
>
> -- Marc
>
>
That issue was discussed
I think one of our friends who is US based can more helpfully answer this,
but I believe osteopathy in the US is somehow different from elsewhere. I
couldn't tell you how, but I seem to remember this being the case.
On 27 May 2014 15:01, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On 05/27/2014 09:44 AM, Stevie
On 05/27/2014 09:44 AM, Stevie Benton wrote:
> American Osteopathic Association
I'm not an expert on the latest woo-woo, but isn't Osteopathy one of the
numerous "faith-based 'medecine'"?
-- Marc
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://m
Hi Nurunnaby,
A similar story has appeared in the Telegraph -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10857468/Dont-diagnose-yourself-on-Wikipedia-doctors-warn.html-
and the BBC -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27586356
The BBC piece is the best of the three and WMUK has reached out to all
Hi,
Today daily mail published a news about Wikipedia Medical related entries.
Title of this news: *Do NOT try to diagnose yourself on Wikipedia! 90% of
its medical entries are inaccurate, say experts*
*! *
Anyone clarify this issue please?
Check this link for news:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/heal
22 matches
Mail list logo
