User talk:Doc James/Archive 140

Nicosan notable enough for a stand-alone article? Your views will be appreciated:-) ∯WBG^converse 12:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Yah enough coverage I think User:Winged Blades of Godric. Have balanced it out a bit. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to inform, delete or modify if I was technically wrong or misleading. RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 17:09, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

User:RIT RAJARSHI per WP:MEDMOS we do not often use long "See also" sections for well written medical articles. Better to simple link terms that are important within the text of the article in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:22, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Having received your message regarding citation of edits to health-related articles I am unable to see the ‘cite’ toolbar on my iPad.

Is this a known problem; should I be editing only in Windows? Rjwillis (talk) 10:05, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

We need references. Visual editor has citation tools that should work on an iPad. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:20, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

why this ?? are you supreme authority on wikipedia ? Uricnobel (talk) 06:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

We need to use references per WP:MEDRS. Plus we need to follow WP:MEDMOS Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:28, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

5% is called as rare

what Manual of Style ? has to do with technical info?

https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/dupuytrens-contracture/ Uricnobel (talk) 06:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

This is a better source and says "Dupuytren contracture occurs in about 5 percent of people in the United States." https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/dupuytren-contracture#statistics And does not call it rare.

For a disease to be rare it must affect less than 1 in 2000 https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/pages/31/faqs-about-rare-diseases

So the other website is not completely accurate. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:33, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Doc James may not make you Doc of All and Know it All. Uricnobel (talk) 06:34, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

affecting fewer than 200,000 people is correct.

The source you mentioned is wrong, it is as per European Union definition. Wikipedia is not EU property.Uricnobel (talk) 06:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Actually, the US legal definition (in a couple of places) is "any disease or condition that affects less than 200,000 persons in the United States", which is a much greater incidence than 200,000 person worldwide, but is still absurdly lower than 5% (it is 0.09% of the US population at the time of passage of the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, and getting lower all the time). This article has a little survey of definitions. I don't think that there is a mainstream definition that has a threshold that would classify a condition with 5% prevalence (5,000 in 100,000) as "rare". ^Bongo_matic 00:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

In case this would interest you, I have filed a report at Wikipedia_talk:WPSPAM#sleepassociation.org. I could be wrong, but it seems suspect (and the way I noticed it was via recent respam, but most links appear to have been added around 2015)... —PaleoNeonate – 07:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

And, happy vacations (I just noticed the tag). —PaleoNeonate – 11:41, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

User:PaleoNeonate agree with the concerns. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:21, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

I watched a documentary on Kratom titled "A Leaf of Faith". Wikipedia has no article on the 2018 documentary but does have an article on Kratom. I added a reference of this documentary to the Wiki article that you deleted and said that it should be listed with the movie. It was the movie. Why should the Wiki article not reference this documentary to wiki readers? Would you consider reversing your deletion?Eschoryii (talk) 03:57, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Why is this documentary notable? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I have never heard of Kratom. I am a pain patient who uses Fentanyl. I watched the documentary on Netflix. The use and abuse of opiates is explosive in America. This documentary definitely portrays Kratom as a useful treatment in lieu of opiates. It does state that the FDA has not approved its use. If Wikipedia has an article on Mitregyna Specosa the topic is notable or someone would want the article deleted. A documentary on the same topic would pass as notable. There were 72,000 opiate overdoes this year. Any treatment that could cause relief should be available to a Wiki reader. A reference to a documentary does not endorse it. I am relatively new to the Wiki world and its policies and those editors who enforce edits. I would like to understand why this information (the documentary) can not be referenced. Could an editor do a separate article on the documentary like a film article? I have no vested interest here. Just help me understand. Thanks.Eschoryii (talk) 20:53, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

No evidence this stuff is effective or safe. Might result in harm. Why would we list a doc from a non reliable source that promotes it ?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC) So be neutral and unbias as long as you agree. I get where you are coming from and better understand why you made your delete. Thanks for your time and I am done with the issue.Eschoryii (talk) 03:42, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

In the film, you talked about using the kratom brand Urban Ice Organics [note: the founder of Urban Ice, Kelly Dunn, is an executive producer of the documentary, and Bell is also involved] ... (ref) Jytdog (talk) 23:21, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

youtube channel hard sells the movie and the company and its product. meh. Jytdog (talk) 23:27, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Could you help setttle these two items for "nicotine" on Wikidata? (−)-nicotine (Q28086552) and nicotine (Q12144) One has no English label (but seems to have all the major external identifiers for nicotine, like Quora, LC Auth ID, JSTOR) and one has the English "nicotine" label (and points to the en.wp article nicotine). Merging them does not seem to be the right thing, but I don't now what is. Thanks! Also pinging Keilana. -- Fuzheado | Talk 14:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Fuzheado So biological molecules generally come in two isomers (left and right) when you manufacture them chemically. Most stuff is a mixture of the two initially but only the left handed one is generally active / found in biological systems.

We have lots of example in pharmacology like omeprazole and esoomeprazole. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:34, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I thought you might like to have a look at this: [1]. They have repeatedly vandalized despite multiple warnings. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 18:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

User:TylerDurden8823 blocked for a bit Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:21, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for advising regarding references in wikipedia. It was my first attempt. I see you have removed some of the references, claiming review articles etc were better. I agree, However, as the field of intranasal naloxone is rapidly moving forward, all my references were articles on medicinal products approved by the FDA in the US and EMA in Europe, and hold a higher scientific credibility as they have been scrutinised beyond a standard peer review. I think it is highly relevant for wikipedia users to be updated on naloxone products entering the marked (eg Narcan Nasal, Nyxoid and Ventizolve).

Regards,

Arne Skulberg Askulberg (talk) 10:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Askulberg general consensus on Wikipedia is to us high quality secondary sources. Also please keep in mind WP:COI. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Doc James, I'm the user you reverted. Please discuss with me through the IP, as I don't want my account more associated with this topic than necessary. I do sincerely believe you are WP:Civil POV pushing, perhaps not to any extreme, nor intentional. I think you just believe the moral of suicide prevention has such absolutism that anyone challenging that morality would constitute absurdity comparable to flat-earth theory. I believe you believe the cause so noble, how could anyone question its nobility. Anyways, an article about the earth wouldn't be filled with evidence the earth is round. If suicide prevention was in fact so dominant than having the suicide article would be the flat earth article in the analogy and the suicide prevention article would be the earth article, now just look how well maintained the articles would be, and clearly that's because everyone who believes in suicide prevention wants to push their morality on those who don't so naturally those who didn't believe suicide should be believed in* or allowed would maintain an expert suicide prevention article to replace the suicide article, just like anyone pushing their pov on wikipedia would probably want to write the article about opposing or neutral opinions and probably careless about the article about their opinion since obviously the only people looking up that article likely already or will start believing that opinion since obviously that POV is so correct someone merely has to read about it to know that it's correct. (obviously not accurate)

• really though the article is written as though the author didn't believe a person could take their life without some "unnatural force" compelling them to.

I would recommend that you take a hands-off approach to editing the suicide article, unless either citing historical/anthropological sources or transporting material from suicide to suicide prevention.

Merely writing about suicide through a medical association/institute/establishment/proffessional's lens, presents POV since only those with that POV believe that suicide is a topic which legally belongs to them or their area. Sure, perhaps in most areas that's de facto reality, yet only for lack of who else would the topic belongs to (a church? [even worse bias]).

Also, the article needs that pov-check banner because most current editors watching the page do display this bias and non-wikipedians who read the article and also perceive the bias need invited to contribute. Otherwise, many will probably assume they'll get met with a mob.

---

Please don't just respond to this with a short quip.

Please respond to all my points, as I don't have any qualms if I wait a week or more for a response, to the contrary I will appreciate a slow thoughtful response more so long as that response comes eventually. I didn't want so involved, yet; I suppose I eased myself in enough that this isn't so terrible, so I'll be checking periodically. Lets try to have a calm thoughtful discussion about this!

2600:1702:1740:2CA0:E179:452:1A2:DE9A (talk) 02:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

You and I appear to disagree the weight that different aspects of the topic should receive. The article has been stable a long time. Changes will need to be discussed and you will need to bring high quality sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

That doesn't really respond to any of my specific comments.

What do you think about leaving up a pov-check banner for a little while,

• to invite further discussion, as well as
• determine if any of the article's regular visitors agrees with the points made?

If I was to make a specific example about a detail belonging in the first paragraph of the lede, how about that Aztec human sacrifice rituals which with few exceptions required voluntary sacrifices? Or, that some anthropologist viewed that as a population control measure.

That's a very notable historical phenomenon often brought up by individuals who seek to romanticize suicide.

Japanese ritual suicide should also get mention.

I don't think I'll be able to find a source which provides scientific evidence that suicide isn't a risk so much as a choice with motivations, because first I would need to find scientific evidence that debunks determinism otherwise known as causality, and that definitely falls outside the article's scope.

I think you view scientific interpretations of fact as facts by extension, rather than opinions about facts.

I think that's where we actually disagree.

2600:1702:1740:2CA0:6472:2168:F2D4:EBD5 (talk) 02:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Check your mail. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 18:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks User:Atsme Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Can you please explain why you removed the whole section about Phage therapy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus&oldid=860292020#Phage_therapy

Maybe you can just remove what you feel needs to be removed, without removing the whole section? Your advice will be appreciated.

Thank you. Riffstilde (talk) 09:02, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Sure User:Riffstilde. That section was based on very poor quality sources. Sources need to follow WP:MEDRS Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

OK. I had read the stuff and more. Please be specific or stop harrassing me. For instance just copy the text and bold what is wrong and tell me why. Thank you.

Riffstilde (talk) 16:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

We do not use predatory publishers such as MDPI.[2]

There are lots of other issues aswell. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. So please give me a list of things that are wrong and I will address them. Now shouldn't we do this process on the article talk page?

Which article talk page would you like to use? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

This 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus Thanks for your prompt reply Riffstilde (talk) 18:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello again. Now you have deleted the Phage Therapy section and placed a small extract in the Research section. Can you please explain and discuss this on the relevant talk page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus Thank you.

Riffstilde (talk) 08:06, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Ref says it is being studied not that it works.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

I have started a thread Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Standard offer request : Rajeshbieee. As the most recent blocking administrator, you may wish to give your thoughts there. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up User:Ritchie333. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:17, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

The same editor is at it on Fournier gangrene. I reverted because it seemed to be a simple lump of opinion without reference to the cites, but it could use an expert taking a look. Pinkbeast (talk) 22:52, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:10, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I think you should see: https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom;TicketID=10831052

You may or may not choose to respond, and this won't be news to you, just one more data point, but FYI.--S Philbrick(Talk) 02:16, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Sphilbrick thanks have replied. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:13, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

DJ- outside my area of expertise, but the editor Ketoacids appears to be exceptionally BOLD in editing carbon monoxide-releasing molecules, and more recently heme oxygenase. I had some interactions on the first topic because parts were being inserted into nutrient articles, but let it drop. Since August the heme oxygenase article has been increased nearly 5X in length, with a lot of the content apparently copied over from the editor's additions to the carbon monoxide article. There is a "See also" to the carbon monoxide-releasing molecules article. David notMD (talk) 10:05, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

User:David notMD Thanks. Looks like trimming of primary sources is needed. Some of the content is overly positive. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:10, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

I will mention it also to Boghog, who has edited both articles in the past. David notMD (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Doc James, you have removed many notable references, such as of Reuters, American Journal of Managed Care, US National Library of Medicine etc. Could you please tell me reason. Thank you. --Gpkp (u • t • c) 04:16, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Please read WP:MEDRS Thank Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:23, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Doc James, I'd appreciate your feedback here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anxiety_disorder#Is_omega-3_for_anxiety_alternative_medicine?

While this is a minor thing there, I believe it raises are more general issue relevant for other medical entries as well. THanks.Lucleon (talk) 09:13, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Lucleon thanks. What do you think about the compromise? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:44, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks good to me; better than what I originally proposed. Thanks for considering my comments on this. Lucleon (talk) 11:59, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

  Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Skin cancer has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 09:00, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes the source was not a good one. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:44, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Your edit summary was misleading and offensive. You accused me, with zero evidence presented, of posting "spam" - a serious allegation. AusLondonder (talk) 17:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

The ref was spammy. Does not qualify as WP:MEDRS. The Health24 group is also involved with selling cars. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:15, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello. This talk page discussion regarding a planned student editing initiative on macular degeneration may interest you and/or benefit from your attention. Hrodvarsson (talk) 23:33, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks yes have that on my watchlist. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:38, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi James,

Please allow me to introduce myself – I am Shubham Choubey from Corporate Communications Team of Zensar Technologies. We have checked and found that information on Wiki about our organization is not updated and also highlighted with paid contribution banner. Requesting you to please help in removing warnings.

Regards, Shubham Choubey Shubhamatzensar (talk) 06:21, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

As you are connected to the company in question please do not edit the article directly. As paid editing was involved with creating the article in question the tag is currently appropriate until review has occurred. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message in my talk page about the article Jonathan Herald. I added connected contributor template in the talk page, btw - it's NOT paid editing. So can you please take that template off?. Can you please also guide me how the article can be expanded? Is it possible to take information from the first reference? Auyon 03:17, 2 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auyon (talk • contribs)

We would need high quality independent sources. What is your relation with the content in question? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:26, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

He treated my uncle Auyon 03:52, 2 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auyon (talk • contribs)

And the picture? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:56, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

I requested for a copyright free photo. This photo is also available here [3]. Auyon 12:40, 4 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auyon (talk • contribs)

Okay so in other words you are working with that person? Basically you are working with a Medical Marketing Firm? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

No. After my uncle told me about him and his work [4] I wanted to write about him (gratitude was a motivator as well). When I asked for a photo, he managed it. I searched for him in healthscope assist [5] and found his profile in it. Almost all the information I put in the article came from it. I tried to follow this article Richard_Lehman_(surgeon) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auyon (talk • contribs) 10:46, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

  Administrator changes

  Justlettersandnumbers • L235

  Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

  Interface administrator changes

  Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

  Oversight changes

  Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

  Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
• There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

  Technical news

• Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
• Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

  Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
• The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
• Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
• Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

Nice to know you Mr. James Heilman, thank you for your suggest, can you help me, how to revising a Draft:Kartenz to be a good article, Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LindaJulian (talk • contribs) 07:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

You need to disclose... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:11, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Nice to know you Mr. James, I swear there's no undisclosed payments for this Draft:Kartenz, Seriously, I wasn't paid for Kartenz, so maybe I could say my relationship could be a friend or family. I just learn to write a good article from an underdog animation studio, that's it. so please help me to learn and make it happen, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LindaJulian (talk • contribs) 14:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

James I am trying to work through the disclosure with this person at their talk page. Jytdog (talk) 16:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay appears they are unwilling to disclose. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I think you'll want to take a look at ticket:2018101110008277 , although perhaps you already know about it. NOT urgent.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Sphilbrick thanks and have reached out. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello James Thank you for pointing out my improper choice of reference and incorrect citation. I have found a much better reference and have inputted the correct citation, following the steps you outlined. I hope all looks well. I appreciate your help, TB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tessa Bennet (talk • contribs) 02:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Sure thanks. Have moved it to the body of the article to keep the first sentence shorter / simplier. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:45, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Re this, you may want to see Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Draft:Kartenz. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:17, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

vaccine isn't effective b/c of armed conflict in region & ICRC--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:33, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunate that war helps diseases continue. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:53, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Doc, I noticed suspected paid editing in Jason Jay Smart (also wrote in Talk:Jason Jay Smart but got no answer). Interestingly the article was translated by same user to many languages, and is "flooded" with poor sources. It was also translated to hewiki, where it was deleted for notability. I'm not well familiar with the rules in enwiki - whether is should be marked with rewrite/suspected paid editing template/deleted etc. Eran (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Agree with concerns User:ערן Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

numbers under 10 are generally written out, except in front of units76.189.141.88 (talk) 15:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah thanks good point :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:27, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

This publication can be found as a cited source in multiple articles dating back five years. DO NOT MAKE CHANGES THAT REMOVE THIS CREDIBLE NOT RETAILER INTERNET PUBLICATION.Mrphilip (talk) 09:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

This[6] is not really a reliable source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:01, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Endometriosis#Further_reading User:Fred Bauder Talk 14:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks replied there. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Doc, I am still researching on Jonathan Herald as you said and User: Spintendo provided with very good guidance. Thanks to both of you for being so helpful. Meanwhile, can you please advise me what can be done to remove the UDP and Advert tags in this article? Thanks in advance for your kind help. Auyon (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 09:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Not sure whether they are notable. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:14, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

So, what would be your suggestion? Shall I continue the research? Please provide me with some guidance. Thanks in advance. Auyon 10:38, 15 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auyon (talk • contribs)

I would not bother. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:40, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Auyon 10:08, 16 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auyon (talk • contribs)

I have used copy/paste as i already had the entire information on a word file, the info on this page regarding typhoid vaccines is not even 10%. There are newer types of typhoid vaccine now available.

You can copy it to your sandbox and work on it further there. What you had was far from ready for publication. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

added[7]worked on it all morning(the 'area' one you had suggested[8] was somewhat difficult, I had to opt for 'bar')--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:17, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Ozzie10aaaa what do you think about colored lines? We have the numbers to the right so we do not need numbers over each point. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

true colored lines could be enough, however for some readers specific numbers so they can follow the table below may be important as the outbreak progresses(as WHO's meeting indicates [9] this will be a long one)...IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi James. Since you moved the two pages, FYI Talk:Bed bug (insect)#Requested move 18 October 2018. Sam Sailor 22:47, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Hope you are having a great day!--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:15, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks User:Sphilbrick Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)