On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Anthony Cole <[email protected]> wrote:

> Regarding expert review, Doc James has just announced that a version of
> Wikipedia's article "Dengue fever" has passed peer review and been accepted
> for publication by the journal Open Medicine. I think this is a special
> moment.
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:MED#This_conversation_is_notable
>
> Anthony Cole <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole>
>


The article will apparently be listed on PubMed. That's indeed an
achievement to be proud of. Well done!

There was a discussion earlier in this thread about the likely quality of
Wikipedia's medical articles, and the curatorial work of WikiProject
Medicine.

I note that in the same post in which Doc James announced this on en:WP, he
also said:

---o0o---

How good is our content? Having looked at much of it I have an okay idea.
We have about 100-200 high or excellent quality medical articles. We have
about 20,000 that are short and just starting out. We have a couple
thousand that are okay ish. We have another few hundred to maybe few
thousand or so that are a complete disaster. So in summary article quality
is variable with a randomly selected article likely to be of moderate to
low quality.

---o0o---

Given his qualifications and his longstanding work in WikiProject Medicine,
James' guess is probably better than most. But it's not something you could
cite.




>
>
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:02 PM, rupert THURNER <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > > > Andreas, you seem to have pre-determined that Wikipedia's medical
> > articles
> > > > are all terrible and riddled with errors.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > And I think you are being needlessly defensive. I have an open mind as
> to
> > > what the results might be. What I am sure of is that neither you nor I
> > nor
> > > the Foundation really know how reliable they are. Why not make an
> effort
> > to
> > > find out?
> >
> > Anybody interested can do it. Now. Anybody interested can improve it.
> Now.
> > Why it does not happen? It happened for other domains as well.
> >
> > In my experience there is only one single measure to improve quality:
> point
> > out the single error which cam be corrected. If you can propose a system,
> > either human or automatic, to do this, feel free.
> >
> > What imo is the bigger problem: many medical articles are written in a
> > language a mortal cannot understand any more.
> >
> > >
> > > > Realistically, they're amongst
> > > > the most likely to receive professional editing and review -
> > Wikiproject
> > > > Medicine does a much better job than people are willing to credit
> them.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, and many editors there are sorely concerned about the quality of
> > > medical information Wikipedia provides to the public.
> >
> > This is the core value of wikipedia since its beginnings: provide a big
> > enough gap to fill.
> >
> > > Incidentally, there was a discussion of the JAOA study in The Atlantic
> > > today:
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/05/can-wikipedia-ever-be-a-definitive-medical-text/361822/
> > >
> > > A member of WikiProject Medicine is quoted in it, as is the study's
> > author.
> > >
> > > —o0o—
> > >
> > > So both sides acknowledge: There are errors in Wikipedia’s health
> > articles.
> > > And that’s a problem, because people use them.
> >
> > Internet literacy includes learning beeing sceptical on what you read i
> > guess .... Wikipedia is not Jesus and never will be, in no domain :)
> >
> > Rupert
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [email protected]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to