James 173

Hi,

I'm a user who is familiar with Wikipedia. I'll be editing (initially medical or other) pages where I or people I am close to have a real-life connection and I have found Wiki's information isn't as good as it could be. Because of possible conflict, I will not generally use my account for non-editing purposes or project pages; I will accept reverting or take disagreements to the talk page more quickly if an edit is disputed; I will try to take more care to add good quality sourced material in a neutral way; I will try to make sure articles represent scientifically or other well sourced information.

My interests are psychological disorders, UK places business and politics, care and welfare bodies like the DWP and NHS, and LGBT. I keep LGBT from my family so thank you for anonymous editing. My trigger for wanting to edit is coming back to the pages on Autism and ADHD, some cancers and eye issues, which are big topics but not great for someone trying to find out information for the first time.

If you can suggest ways to improve my editing, drop a note, James 173

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I saw your edits at Dopamine. Please feel free to get in touch with me any time if you have any questions at all about editing here. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks you, James 173

James 173, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi James 173! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 04:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Please add sources

Hi James! I have seen a couple of your edits. In some of them you write text without stating sources. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 10:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi yourself! Thank you, I thought I had been careful to cite everything I add, perhaps except for statements I don't think anyone seriously disputes. You can see that on the RLS wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Restless_legs_syndrome&diff=510610673&oldid=510610101). The RLS article was bad, it claimed opiate withdrawal "caused" - I guess without exception - "the most notable RLS", and I read that 5 times and still no idea what "the most notable RLS" means. I think it meant "withdrawal can cause RLS" (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Restless_legs_syndrome&diff=510663206&oldid=510631378).

The edit you might mean is this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Restless_legs_syndrome&diff=510688970&oldid=510688729) but the section was just wrong before I edited it and the cites are below it.

Before I edited, the section said "no method of preventing RLS has been established or studied. Instead medical responses focus on treating the condition". The next part immediately contradicted saying how secondary RLS can be prevented. I edited to say "generally" no prevention exists, "unless due to specific preventable causes" when treating the causes "may" also remove or reduce RLS, which is much more accurate to the next section "Secondary RLS may be cured if precipitating medical conditions (anemia, venous disorder) are managed effectively". James 173

I thought your edits were a real improvement compared to what was written before, which is one of the reasons I didn't remove them even though they were unsourced (plus that the original text was unsourced). However, your edits would have been yet better if you would have added a source. And, by the way, if you sign you should use ~~~~. With friendly regards! Lova Falk talk 18:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Messages

Hello. You have a new message at User_talk:Lova Falk#Amino acid's talk page.
Hello. You have a new message at User_talk:Lova Falk#Page rename's talk page.

Hello, James 173. You have new messages at Lova Falk's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Glutamate receptor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to CALM and Precursor

Alloprotein (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Base

Amino acid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Polarity

Circadian rhythm sleep disorder (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Polymorphism

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Table on familial adenomatous polyposis

James, thanks for expanding the FAP page. I do think that the content of the table could be reduced in size, perhaps by paraphrasing the direct quotes in summary style. JFW | T@lk 20:05, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I do not know how to. The sources are dense "key need-to-know" lists of the most crucial information for any summary of FAP would (or should) contain, lacking any slack, and almost impossible to paraphrase; moreover to paraphrase invites inaccuracy. I am happy they meet "fair use" and attribution demands, I also omitted lesser information and expansions from the source. Putting in quotations was the best way to honour the sources and make clear this was their original work.

James 173 (talk) 21:07, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)