Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:11, 1 October 2014

Thank you for being one of Misplaced Pages's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language

	The Cure Award
	In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Misplaced Pages. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi, Doc James and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation

reflinks link

http://tools.wmflabs.org/dispenser/cgi-bin/viewer.py/Reflinks

https://tools.wmflabs.org/fengtools/reflinks/

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Gender-neutral language

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Gender-neutral language. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Ebola article

In the future please use group consensus when you make major article decisions such as the split that you did for Guinea in the Ebola epidemic article. Gandydancer (talk) 11:57, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

The article wasn't split, Gandy. Your article Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa has not been affected in any way. There's nothing from that article in the new Guinea article. There wasn't anything useful to transfer. It's only a summary, which it should be when there's a main article. I think you don't understand what a split means. A split will happen when, for example, the 'responses' section gets removed and moved to a new article. That's something you are having done. That's a split. None of the new country articles represent a split. There might be a relevant WP page on this. SW3 5DL (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Here's the link that will explain moving content here. SW3 5DL (talk) 15:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

please do not call an article "your" article as it implies WP:OWN. Setting up a subarticle is something that needs to be done with care and thought so that the editors working on the topic can keep everything aligned. btw the relevant guidance articles are WP:SPLIT and WP:SUMMARY.unsigned comment made by Jytdog

The article is not a split. I don't know any other way to explain that. Perhaps you could provide diffs that show what you say is a page split? Also, remember to sign your edits. SW3 5DL (talk) 16:08, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Jytdog, I wanted to mention I hope you won't make comments like this one again to anybody on WP, but especially to Brian. Your comment chased him off WP. Fortunately, he's back now, as he should be. He's done a wonderful job on the article. You completely misunderstood what he was saying in the exchange on the article talk page, which didn't have anything to do with you at all, and on top of that, he came back and clarified what he meant, which you apparently ignored. You really need to read through another editor's comment before you respond. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

considering the encylopedia as a whole, what has been done is a split, per WP:SPLIT. There is no other valid justification in WP for creating a content fork. Jytdog (talk) 17:39, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Looks like the articles in question are perfectly allowed Spinouts. Cheers. SW3 5DL (talk) 19:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

you are getting it now. gandy's email did not dispute that they are allowed. what she asked for was that we discuss the strategy for doing that, as they are related to the main article. this is indeed best practice. Jytdog (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2014 (UTC)