On one hand, it would be pretty stupid for a person to rely on WP for
drug interaction information, but it also might be wise for us to
institute some kind of disclaimer at the top of pages related to drugs
(over-the-counter as well as prescription).
Matt
> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:16:46 +0000
> From: "David Gerard"
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] How's our coverage of medications?
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> http://in.reuters.com/article/health/idINTRE4AN7BO20081124
>
http://in.reuters.com/article/health/idINTRE4AN7BO20081124
"NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Consumers who rely on the user-edited Web
resource Wikipedia for information on medications are putting
themselves at risk of potentially harmful drug interactions and
adverse effects, new research shows.
"Dr. Kevin A. Clauson of Nova Southeastern University in Palm Beach
Gardens, Florida and his colleagues found few factual errors in their
evaluation of Wikipedia entries on 80 drugs. But these entries were
often missing important information, for example the fact that the
anti-inflammatory drug Arthrotec (diclofenac and misoprostol) can
cause pregnant women to miscarry, or that St. John's wort can
interfere with the action of the HIV drug Prezista (darunavir)."
Personally, if I edit a drug article I try to link the official US or
UK (or preferably both) patient information leaflets, and a list of
side-effects and their known frequency (1 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000,
etc) is highly relevant. Anyone else?
- d.
Hi,
this is something that made me somewhat lose faith in my eye vision
(which is horribly bad anyway):
in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics, two entries, viz.
"Pages" (second line) and "Active users (registered users with at
least one edit or logged action in the past 30 days)" (8th line) have
a small asterisk (*) next to them. I take it that the asterisk denotes
a reference to a footnote...but I'm unable to find anything at the
bottom of the page, not even a sentence like "Entries marked with an
asterisk mean..."
What on earth am I missing? Where is explained what these
stars/asterisks are for?
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Bimmler
mbimmler(a)gmail.com
Folks,
Here's one way to avoid dealing with formatting the dates issue - don't
include them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_Lewis
With this gem, the reader must go to the references to find the Birth &
Death dates! :-(.
Marc Riddell
In a message dated 11/26/2008 7:39:22 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
puppy(a)KillerChihuahua.com writes:
This accomplishes two things: 1) you might succeed in knocking the page
off Google’s front page for appearing to have gained a spammy link
profile and 2) it gives you a legit looking reason to remove existing
links on powerful Wiki pages.>>
--------------
I haven't read the article, but they are saying to do this *just* to knock a
page off the front page of Google hits ?
I don't really understand the motivation.
**************Life should be easier. So should your homepage. Try the NEW
AOL.com.
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000…)
Dear friends,
We are conducting a study on the motivation of the knowledge sharing on
Wikipedia. Your experience of the read from and write to Wikipedia is very
important to the design and management of this knowledge platform. The
survey will take about two minutes. We deeply appreciate your help on
answering the following questions.
After the survey is done, we will randomly select twenty persons and
present them with USB 2GB Flash Drives. Besides, with each valid
questionnaire, we will donate US $1 dollar to the Wikimedia Foundation. The
result of this survey is analyzed in an anonymous way and is only regarded
as the academic use. Please feel free to fill out the questionnaire. Thanks
again for your time and valuable input.
May happiness and health be with you everyday!
★ On-line Questionnaire: http://140.119.19.152:8080/wiki/
Shari S. C. Shang
Eldon Y. Li
Professor,
Department of Management Information Systems,
National Chengchi University
Tel.: +886-2-82374038； Fax: +886-2-29393754 ； E-mail: s1213527(a)yahoo.com.
tw
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 19:29, phoebe ayers wrote:
>
>>> Most probably, most users who type in "Ireland" are looking for the
>>> article
>>> about the Republic of Ireland. However, we can't escape the fact
>>> that the
>>> term Ireland is ambiguous. Some users would be unaware that six of
>>> the 32
>>> Irish counties are not currently part of the Republic.
>>
>> I would actually argue that a reader who doesn't know anything about
>> Ireland (picture a schoolchild in the US doing a project for St.
>> Patrick's day)
>
> I don't think Ireland is all that obscure.
Well, no, you wouldn't, nor would I. But is it possible that not every
English-speaker in the world is quite so well informed on the subject?
Anybody who can name all 32 counties, or even all four provinces, is
probably a poor judge of the matter.
Disambiguation pages are to make the ambiguous unambiguous. So is
Ireland ambiguous? I reckon the answer, as so often, would be that it
depends. If you're looking for stuff on natural sciences, chances are
you want the island. The current situation suits just fine. Same for
history. Current events? The current situation is icky. Culture? High
culture, ok. Pop culture, probably not. Biographies? Dead people
handily outnumber the living, so the present setup should be good,
although in practice it may not be until other groups are as well
represented as TDs, hurlers and gaelic footballers.
In my humble opinion, this is just more old bollocks of the kind we
have more than enough of on topics like Macedonia. If it's not what to
call the political entity formerly known as the Free State, it's
British Isles versus Britain and Ireland, or some nonsense with the
Troubles or the Famine. Ireland an honorary Eastern European subject?
It makes sense.
Angus McLellan