User:Zad68

I wonder why in Greece experts contend in the games and non-experts award the prizes.

— Anacharsis of Scythia (c. 590 BCE)


Hello, I am Zad68, but please feel free to call me Zach. I am a volunteer Wikipedia editor just like you are (or could be!). I am particularly interested in medical topics, and I am an active member of Wikipedia's Medicine Wikiproject. I also like to edit or review articles in the natural sciences, and occasionally attend to the odd biography, especially if the person relates to an article I am working on.

I think the good article review process is one of the most important initiatives on Wikipedia. I have messed around with developing a bot using the account ZadBot, and plan to develop a bot to provide tools to automate the more tedious parts of doing reviews of WP:MED-scope articles in particular.

If you have any questions about things like sourcing for medical articles, the GA process, or just getting started with Wikipedia, please drop me a note on my User Talk page and I'll try to help!

Quick reference for some of my common edit summary abbreviations

  • r = reply
  • c = comment
  • c/e = copyedit

Zad68's Rules of Content

  • The best defense against bad content is good content. In fact it's probably the only defense.
  • The Wikipedia Catch-22: You'll do your best content work on articles for subjects you know little about and don't particularly care about. But then, of course, you won't be particularly motivated to work on such articles.
  • Any edit that adds biomedical information and explicitly points out it's based on a "scientific study published in peer-reviewed journal" probably needs to be reverted per WP:MEDRS.
  • You don't have to respect the subject of the article you're working on, but you do have to respect the sources.
  • This is why I find In popular culture sections problematic.
  • This is just one reason why we should almost never be citing primary sources for scientific information.

Focus

Improving Wikipedia's important articles

I found this essay and the accompanying slide show to be very influential in the choices I make of articles I'd like to do significant development work on. Wikipedia has a lot of articles, but overall the most important articles (as determined by the number of views) do not get as much development attention as they deserve. At over 12 years old, en.WP has over 4 million articles; just about all the articles that are on what might be considered core encyclopedic topics have already been started, but most are still not yet at GA quality. Editors should be motivated to work on the articles for these core topics, and I hope efforts like the Million Award will be effective in doing so.

A Cochrane a day

The Cochrane Library is a very well-respected publisher and repository of high-quality secondary sources of medical evidence. Wikipedia has partnered with them to provide free access to the full texts of their articles, and as of September 2013 is still handing out free accounts to editors active in developing WP:MEDICINE-content—see WP:COCHRANE to apply for your own free account! I got an account and to make sure Wikipedia benefits from it, I am trying to do a Cochrane a day: whatever other content work I might be doing, each weekday I will pull a Cochrane article and update something with it. An article will benefit, I'll learn something new, and maybe I'll get ideas for future content work. Should be fun!

OK I have to admit these are good...

Stuff to do

What's going on at WP:MEDICINE

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(24 more...)

Proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

(6 more...)

Redirects for discussion

(18 more...)

Files for discussion

Featured article candidates

Good article nominees

(3 more...)

Good article reassessments

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

(12 more...)

Articles for creation

(79 more...)

Barnstars...


Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.