User talk:FoodPuma

Links

User Page

Main Page

Talk Page

Osteochondritis Sandbox

Free Sandbox

Current Project

Contribs

This article was intensively edited as an educational assignment: WikiProject AP Biology.

We invite you to join us to make further improvements and changes. We are not claiming any sort of ownership. This is a project in collaboration.

Click here to leave a new message. Also, please remember to always sign your messages with '~~~~'

Welcome!

Let me be the first to welcome you and commend you on your enthusiasm and ability to follow instructions. The Wikipedia mantra is BE BOLD. For me at least, just making an account took a great deal of courage. The next logical step in your Wikipedia indoctrination is to energize your home page. It will serve as an excellent place to learn some of the basic wiki-codes without dorking up an article. Editing skills will require some experimentation and self teaching. The easiest way to start is to visit others and “steal” some ideas. By that - I mean click the edit tab and see their html codes which you can copy and paste into yours. CAREFUL --- don’t edit their page…. COPY not cut!!!!! You can then adjust it to reflect your own personal style. Feel free to be creative. Try to provide some insight into who you are while still maintaining your Anonymity. Personally I like the community’s use of user boxes to provide some insight into your way of thinking. --JimmyButler (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BIO

This user's favourite subject is Biology.

Some suggestions

Hi. It looks to me like you're very serious about this project, and that you probably won't mind picky (negative) comments. Looking at your draft of the article, I react to the word "resulting" in "due to a squeaking sound sometimes resulting from the joint". Can a sound result from a joint? It's probably possible to find a better word or phrase.

Sentence "This build up is surgically removed most of the time." needs improvement. See also paragraph below about surgery.

"It has been theorized that the increase in osteochondritis dissecans may be associated with increased participation in sports." What increase? In an individual, in society? Increased from what to what? (Partly explained in the following section, I see. Perhaps combine or move some info. Also, it may be good to give an indication of usual age at presentation/diagnosis nearer the top of the article.) Another thought: should osteochondritis dissecans be italicized throughout? (I don't know the answer to that question - take a look at lots of articles about conditions with similarly non-English names.)

"your pains ", "your blood stream " --oops, we don't write to "you" on Wikipedia. Easy to re-phrase. You'll need to consider throughout whether to refer to "one's pains" instead of "your", or to "patients", "sufferers", or to "people/an individual/a person with the condition" etc. Variation is good. Some people really don't like the word "sufferer".

I think physiotherapy is all-one-word, and it can, as such, be wikilinked. Advice: always check the article you're linking to, to see if it is indeed pertinent, and to avoid redirects and disambiguation pages.

"then surgery is necessary. There is an estimated 50% chance that this treatment will work without surgical intervention." Though some people^[who?][;-)] criticize weasel words, it is usually wise to moderate such statements as "is necessary" to "may be necessary", "often is indicated" or the like. The second sentence quoted needs a reference. Keep in mind, too, that Wikipedia articles are supposed to apply worldwide. "Necessary" surgery is hardly an option for most(?) people.

"disturbance of the usual growth process" Does "usual" here mean "normal"?

A quote such as "well recognized but poorly understood" needs citing.

Well, I got carried away here, with my red pencil. Most of this you'd have figured out yourself. Hope some of it helps. Cheers, --Hordaland (talk) 11:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Research Research Research --- Its all about the Research

You are well ahead of the pack on this one. For most of the class at his point - I simply am hoping for a confidence builder in the creation and editing of their user page.

However; Step 4 for this project --- I will share with you in advance. (Note: Step 3 will be to select your topic)

Locate and print every credible document that has been published on this subject. Sort out who are the leaders in the field. With access to NC-Wise [1] you can obtain a fairly significant journal data base; which should include many of the prominent medical references. I'll share the password in class. In the past, the in-class research papers for which this project is a substitute; I expected at least 30 references to be cited. For the Wikipedia assignment; you will be providing me a list of 50, listed on your talk page with links to either the abstracts or the full articles or the websites sponsored by credible organizations.

In obtaining GA status... much will be made of consistent and accurate formatting of references. That too will be topic of discussion in class. There are templates. Painfully tedious!

Point being, don't get too caught up in the formatting and phrasing until you have FULLY researched the topic! The research part is the heart of this assignment.

I do admire your enthusiasm! Of course now you have to share with your classmates how to add a picture to the Wikipedia data base. The price you pay for fame!!!!! --JimmyButler (talk) 03:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As to be expected. You've grasp the nuances and complexity of citations. The key is to use a consistent format; which on a brief scan appears to be the case. There is some flexibilty at the GA level; however, zero tolerance regarding accuracy and format in an FA attempt. I was fortunate to have SandyGeorgia (A wiki - Godess) beat ours to a pulp over citations, and then out of pity clean-up our mess; if you stick with your formating perhaps you can avoid such humilation! My confidence and thus expectations for success are increasing by the day... keep setting the standards. --JimmyButler (talk) 01:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted some general pointers to your Wikiproject talk page (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AP Biology 2008#Observations and pointers), and by way of appreciation for your nice comments back to me, I chose Osteochontritis Dessecans as my example for searching PubMed - go look at easy way to create {{cite journal}} mark-up, and (as per thread below on duplicated links) with ref-tag's name parameter already filled in for you .:-) David Ruben ^Talk 00:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Book References

Take a look at the Introduction to Evolution entry. We linked the in-text citations to the Book reference in an indirect way. Look in the Notes and find the author Diamond. See how that is linked first: from the in text citation; yet clicking on his name takes you to the Book references. Like everything else, I stole the codes without actually understanding the logic. Ex. ref>(Diamond 1992, p. 16)</ref was the in-text citation format less the first and last < and >. Then this code was pasted for the actual book under References: {citation |last= Diamond |first= Jared |year= 1992 |authorlink=Jared Diamond |title= The Third Chimpanzee: the evolution and future of the human animal|publisher= HarperCollins |location= New York |isbn= 0060183071 } less the first and last { and } to keep from being an html here. Not easy to explain... get with me in class. --JimmyButler (talk) 02:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Images from medical journals are usually copyrighted by either the journal or the authors, and usually both. Moreover, if the images display a person this person may have given consent for its publication in a journal, but not necessarily in other outlets. It can therefore be very hard to find suitable images for medical articles.

A small number of medical journals subscribes to the Creative Commons philosophy (e.g. the journal Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases), and these images may be uploaded to Wikipedia under the relevant license. Alternatively, you may need to draw diagrams yourself, or contact the authors of recent journal articles if they would like to send you an image that can be uploaded under the GFDL, CC or even public domain. JFW | T@lk 20:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

You've been doing a great job, but I noticed this, so I wanted to steer you towards Wikipedia:Footnotes#Naming_a_ref_tag_so_it_can_be_used_more_than_once. (If you use this tool, it automatically handles this issue for you.) --Arcadian (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FoodPuma

		The Original Barnstar
		Hi FoodPuma, I'm Prom3th3an and I am a experienced editor and helper of wikipedia. I have recently discovered your class's wikiproject and would like to thankyou for taking the time to contribute to Wikipedia with (what I can tell) upmost enthusiasm. Your effort is greatly appreciated. I look forward to seeing the end result of your article mid next year and most likly drop in and offer advice to you along the way as I am freely available to answer any quires you may have. A final word of advice would be WP:BEBOLD. All the Best «l\| Ψrom3th3ăn ™\|l» (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, thanks for offering help. I definitely will need it. :) --Somertime02 (talk) 02:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The feed back from the peer review was excellent. From my perspective, the article looks very good. Best of Luck!--JimmyButler (talk) 05:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, I had just finished reading the article when you posted. Maybe there will be an interest since so many admins. are watching the two projects. It would be nice to score first and send notice to our Canadian friends. You will just have to be patient. Unfortunately, the title is not likely to attract the attention of a broad range of Admins. --- its rather complex; unlike evolution which was like a magnet. I was frankly shocked at how fast the peer review went. Don't be disappointed if they find holes in it; although you've cleared the primary hurdles from the start - that being citation issues. Do you plan to go straight from GA to FA or is there more to this subject? --JimmyButler (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't shout for help

Your choice of edit summary of Help!, had me running there and I failed to see any problem ! I think your edit summary should have been more along lines "I must not imply ownership", however frustrated at yourself you may have been :-)

So anything I can help out with ? David Ruben ^Talk 23:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be away over this weekend, so no rush to grab my attention :-) David Ruben ^Talk 23:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nom

I might be able to review your nom this weekend ...but to tell the truth, getting through the GA backlog is a part of Wikipedia's reality. It can sometimes take several weeks. The best way to get an article reviewed is to review other articles. So roll up your sleeves and reduce the overall backlog by reviewing any article that interests you. Many reviewers are in high school themselves. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abstracts

You're doing a great job, but I wanted to point out: in this edit, you correctly added the citation to PMID 3316236, but you copied content directly from the abstract into the Wiki article. You'd need to either put the content into your own words, or put the phrase in quotation marks. --Arcadian (talk) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check your talk page: I was working in class and didn't have a chance to finish my editing before I left... It is however fixed now. Food_Puma 10:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing it. --Arcadian (talk) 13:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Half a step

Hi, thought it only proper to indicate the GA nomination for you at your project page thus :-) David Ruben ^Talk 22:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:OCD Lession-2.jpg

Permission to reproduce from emedicine: do you have proof for such a claim? eMedicine is copyrighted, if you have obtained permission via email, you should send it to WP:OTRS. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, your doing our articles a favour. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any permission on their part is very unlikely to comply with our guidelines, unless they ascertain that the original creator indeed licensed it under a creative commons license. An OTRS volunteer will look in to the matter once you forward the email: meanwhile, I've started at deletion discussion on Commons. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should suffice if you forward the email you got from them, they will determine if it is enough and they'll guide you through what needs to be done further. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This falls under a restricted or educational license, which is not allowed on Wikipedia (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing ) and should be deleted. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:41, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]