See archived messages from pre-2024 here.

Women in Red January 2024 edit

 
 
Women in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296


Online events:

Announcement

  • In 2024 Women in Red also has a one biography a week challenge as part
    of the #1day1woman initiative!

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

  Facebook |   Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply


Platt Report 1959 edit

@Zeromonk: Why did you take 30k out this article, in a supposed drive-by copyedit? scope_creepTalk 19:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Scope creep: thanks for asking, was being bold - the section went well beyond the scope of the report but did apply to children's hospitals, the article for which was lacking this context and gets far more pageviews too. If you think I was a bit drastic, very happy to discuss what elements you think should be woven back in? Zeromonk (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ah, I see you've reverted. I know it may have seemed drastic but I took real care over developing the encyclopaedic tone of the content and removing many repetitions, making the rest chronological and then adding it to Children's hospital where it was particularly relevant and more visible. I should've put an explanation in a talk message but I hope you'll AGF and consider redoing some of the editing. Zeromonk (talk) 20:20, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
No I won't. It took me months to write that article and all of it is salient to the context of the main theme, taken from a report on the platt report itself, written decade later for a successful doctorate thesis. And there is other linked articles that go along with it, which rely on that article. The context was added so the reader understands what is going on, which is perfectly acceptable in a complex article. Children's hospital's have nothing to do with the Platt report, are only tangentially linked. The core of it is attachement theory. I don't think you grasped that. The reader needs to know why it was created. The summary article you've completed on different reports, for example Cumberlege Report 1986 don't tell the reader exactly why the report was written. There is no context there and the single sentence you put in, doesn't cover it, by a long shot. When writing about reports, you need to tell the reader exactly why the report was written in the first place. There is pre-conditions on that article to tell the reader of the events leading up to the report and why they occurred and post conditions. Its a complete mystery on that article. Don't change it again, your not a good copyeditor and I don't trust that you even know what your doing. scope_creepTalk 21:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm sorry you feel that way. I won't edit the article again, I have no interest in an edit war, I was just trying to clarify. If you believe that some context is lacking from the article on other reports (Cumberlege has only just been created, I don't doubt there is more to say) and would like to contribute, please do. Zeromonk (talk) 21:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
The platt report article, the scope on it is about the discovery of attachment theory which took about 50-60 years for it to be worked out, it was very complex and the report is the lead up to that, part of the whole discovery process, and what happened there and showing what needed to be done when they discovered it. Because it a complex series of events, you can't just present an summary article, which explains what the report is, in a sentence or two with some conclusions to the reader. It doesn't work. It needs real context, detailed background information, so they understand what it is, step by step. Essentially, the more complex the subject, the more context you have to put in, so the reader understands what is being presented. It took me ages to find that out and it was only when a women came in asking about it, did I discover there wasn't enough information there for them to understand it. The whole article was wasted. The context on the Cumberlege article is fairly basic, but important nevertheless. I hope that helps and gives you some explanation of why I think it is important it stays together. scope_creepTalk 22:12, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 10 January 2024 edit

Hey edit

I noticed you have been editing some COVID-related articles recently. Thank you. A bunch of us hang out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine, and you're welcome to join us. It's a good place to ask questions about finding good sources for medical content or writing style. If you're more interested in COVID specifically, then of course there is Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19 as well. Feel free to put it on your watchlist, or stop by to say hello some time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

DYK nomination of Platt Report 1964 edit

  Hello! Your submission of Platt Report 1964 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Women in Red February 2024 edit

 
Women in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298


Online events:

Announcement

  • Please let other wikiprojects know about our February Black women event.

Tip of the month:

  • AllAfrica can now be searched on the ProQuest tab at the WP Library.

Other ways to participate:

  Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

The Signpost: 31 January 2024 edit

DYK for Platt Report 1964 edit

On 5 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Platt Report 1964, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Platt Report was commissioned to improve British nursing education, as at the time up to 50 per cent of trainee nurses failed to qualify? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Platt Report 1964. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Platt Report 1964), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Kusma (talk) 00:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

DYK for Salmon Report edit

On 7 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Salmon Report, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Salmon Report (1966) led to the loss of the job title "matron" from UK hospitals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Salmon Report. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Salmon Report), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Kusma (talk) 12:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

This Month in Education: January 2024 edit

The Signpost: 13 February 2024 edit

Orphaned non-free image File:TIHR Logo.png edit

 

Thanks for uploading File:TIHR Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Women in Red March 2024 edit

 
Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301


Online events:

Announcements

Tip of the month:

  • When creating a new article, check various spellings, including birth name, married names
    and pseudonyms, to be sure an article doesn't already exist.

Other ways to participate:

  Instagram |   Pinterest |   Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessagingReply

The Signpost: 2 March 2024 edit

This Month in Education: February 2024 edit