This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Question about Wikipedia Pictures
Hey Rytyho, I noticed that the Arrowhead Regional Medical Center article has no picture. Any ideas about how to get a picture of it on to wikipedia? I'm not an expert when it comes to the fair use stuff and I don't have experience uploading pictures to wikipedia. Anyway, just wondering if you had any insight about this. Let me know when you have a chance.TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
That's a good question. The easiest and simplest way is to upload a picture that you've taken, or a picture someone else took who gives you permission to upload it to wikipedia. I've tried, albeit not very aggressively, to acquire such an image, and have so far been unsuccessful.
Otherwise, you need to deal with fair use. Unfortunately, I believe most pictures of Arrowhead RMC that you might find online do not qualify for fair use. If it's not a logo, or taken by a federal employee, or over 100 years old, they tend to not be fair use... Do you have any particular photos in mind? Rytyho usa (talk) 08:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
No, I didn't have a specific picture in mind. I've just seen pictures of the place and it looks nice. I think the article would greatly benefit from having a picture of the place. I don't have any pictures of it myself or anything though and I don't think I know anyone with pictures of it either. I would do the fair use stuff if I really knew how but unfortunately I don't.
I agree - a picture would definitely help the article out significantly. It sure it is possible that a picture could qualify under some form of free use, but I'm like you - I don't understand the copyright regulatons to confidently know when that is the case. In the meantime, I'll start looking again for a free use pic of Arrowhead RMC; it is a nice looking hospital. Sorry I'm not of more immediate help! Rytyho usa (talk) 08:28, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I have added a couple photos of Arrowhead! Rytyho usa (talk) 01:25, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
I saw your edit on the Lymphoma page which I had partly edited. You have rightly tagged it under Haemato-oncology taskforce. But I would strongly insist that you label all your edits (though you label most of your edits).DiptanshuTalk 10:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. Thank you for the feedback, and for working on the lymphoma page. Rytyho usa (talk) 03:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Reference formatting help
Hey Rytyho, I have a question for you about reference formatting. I've been working on the Touro College article a bit and I replaced a primary reference with a more objective reference but I cannot seem to format it properly. It's an https and it won't show the title of the page as a link but keeps the url separate for some reason and I don't know what to do. Can you help? Thanks buddy. Sincerely, TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Sure thing - I checked it out, and it looks like the issue was a page break that was placed within the reference. As easy to fix as it is to overlook. Glad to help! Rytyho usa (talk) 22:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Appreciate it, I just kept looking at it last night and I didn't see what was wrong with the formatting. It was awfully frustrating. Thanks for the help. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:43, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
JAOA
Hey Rytyho, I think you can go ahead and change the title of the article. I haven't seen any objections raised.TylerDurden8823 (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Absolutely - thanks for the reminder. It looks like I cannot do a simple name change on that article, because the destination name already exists as a redirect to that page, which makes it more complicated. I posted it to a page for requests of technical name changes. Shouldn't be controversial for any reason, so it ought to happen quickly. Rytyho usa (talk) 22:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
It's already done. Have a look. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:38, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Email?
Hey Rytyho, I hope you're doing well, do you have an email account through which we can communicate? TylerDurden8823 (talk) 03:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Never mind, I think I figured it out and I sent you a message by email (I think). TylerDurden8823 (talk) 03:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)D
Hey Rytyho, did you happen to get my message?TylerDurden8823 (talk) 16:31, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Rytyho usa. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi TylerDurden - yes, I've got your email; sorry for the delayed response. Unfortunately, I would not be comfortable with that. I am somewhat familiar with image policy, but only within a limited scope, and I make sure to stay within that scope. If you come across any images for which you have permission to add to wikipedia, then by all means, add them. I just wouldn't be comfortable doing it myself. Sorry! Good luck. Rytyho usa (talk) 02:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm not clear what you would be uncomfortable with. Conversing with me via email? Or helping me with uploading images (I'm guessing the latter). If so, no problem, it's probably best that I go through the process of learning to do it myself anyway or have someone more experienced with the images show me.TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:33, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, email is totally fine; I just responded here because it's an older email account that I rarely use anymore. Sorry I'm not of more help here - there's just a lot of legality that is beyond my expertise. As always, I'm happy to help on any projects/articles that you're working on, to the extent that I'm able. Rytyho usa (talk) 18:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
A description has been added. Rytyho usa (talk) 06:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Optometry
Dear Editor, Last year you edited Optometry and Listing of Optometry Schools websites. You did a splendid job which I am sure was appreciated by many readers. On 2 June 2013 somebody has vandalised these articles. Could you kindly revert to your version. I am sure many of us and readers will appreciate your help once again. Regards Verbum Veritas (talk) 16:03, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.
Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Permissions for this file have been uploaded. Rytyho usa (talk) 20:58, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Thoughts on Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine edit
Hey Rytyho, I wanted to hear your opinion about Alexbrn's recent edit on this page. I've always been a bit wary of using Quackwatch as a source and I've seen that this has been extensively debated on Wikipedia and I don't think I ever saw a clear resolution/decision on the matter one way or the other. I ask because the article that Dr. Barrett wrote seems, IMO, overtly biased in tone, uses outdated terminology (and now outdated data), and paints, what I think, is a misleading picture of the osteopathic medical profession. However, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter. Perhaps there is more recent data showing that the statements Alexbrn put from this older article are no longer true. Anyway, let me know what you think when you have a chance. Thanks. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 22:10, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi TylerDurden8823, thanks for the heads-up. I also have some reservations about the inclusion of that content. I didn't quite feel it was an edit worthy of reverting (being good-faith and all), although I see that an IP user has attempted to revert it. Certainly it's worth discussing on the talk page, being as controversial a resource as it is. I'll get a thread started. Thanks for the heads-up. It might be helpful to see if there were any conclusions drawn from other threads, especially if they relate specifically to osteopathic medicine. Rytyho usa (talk) 05:10, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Even if other threads have reached some conclusion, as time passes by and the field of osteopathic medicine continues to change, it seems like this article becomes more and more out of date and there are probably superior sources from which we can derive this information. If it's still true that a higher proportion of DOs engage in alternative forms of medical therapy (my guess would be that, if it's still true, that this is a declining trend), some of which are unestablished or have evidence against them, then yes, I can see the value of mentioning this in the article. However, this one direct quote from this older article, which I maintain is written in a pretty biased tone, doesn't seem very NPOV from my view. I think there are more neutral ways to frame/write this if it is still a true statistic today. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 01:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
P.S. the discussion is ongoing (annoyingly at length). If you have anything to contribute, feel free. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 03:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Endowment data
It's not terribly important but in a recent edit you replaced a university-produced reference with the most recent NACUBO public table with an edit summary asserting that the NACUBO data is independent of the university. The NACUBO datum was obtained from the university so the NACUBO tables aren't completely independent of the university. It's entirely possible that the university-published information is more up-to-date. ElKevbo (talk) 22:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I did not realize that - thank you for filling me in! I just reverted the edit to the prior (more uptodate) reference. Thanks again. Rytyho usa (talk) 08:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:American Osteopathic College of Radiology logo.gif
Hello, Rytyho usa. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I forgot you rarely check your mail. There's a discussion at WP:MED that might interest you. All I ask is you take a look and consider participating. Thanks Rytyho! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Ross University School of Medicine
Hi,
Thanks for your edits to the Ross University School of Medicine page. Unfortunately, the page is under frequent attack from a disgruntled former student who has actually been issued a cease and desist order for starting a number of malicious websites designed to attack the school. It appears he has taken his attacks to Wikipedia now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HI302 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. I'll have a look at the page as soon as I get a chance. I know that page has been subject to a lot of edit warring. Keeping it up to good objective standards has been a challenge. Rytyho usa (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:American Osteopathic Board of Nuclear Medicine logo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:American Osteopathic Board of Nuclear Medicine logo.jpg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, just to clarify, this somewhat fuzzy image of the logo was replaced by a sharper version of the image. Wikimedia was provided consent by the American Osteopathic Board of Nuclear Medicine to use the logo on the appropriate Wikipedia page. The new logo can be seen on the American Osteopathic Board of Nuclear Medicine. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that, and the new version definitely looks better. Thanks! Rytyho usa (talk) 02:23, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Western University of Health Sciences you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman(talk) 01:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Physiology gives us an understanding of how and why things in the field of medicine happen. Together, let us jumpstart the project and get it going. Our energy is all it needs.
Based on the long felt gap for categorization and improvization of WP:MED articles relating to the field of physiology, the new WikiProject Physiology has been created. WikiProject Physiology is still in its infancy and needs your help. On behalf of a group of editors striving to improve the quality of physiology articles here on Wikipedia, I would like to invite you to come on board and participate in the betterment of physiology related articles. Help us to jumpstart this WikiProject.
Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
You can tag the talk pages of relevant articles with {{WikiProject Physiology|class=|importance=}} with your assessment of the article class and importance alongwith. Please note that WP:Physiology, WP:Physio, WP:Phy can be used interchangeably.
You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing physiology articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
Why not try and strive to create a good article! Physiology related articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!
Your contributions to the WikiProject page, related categories and templates is also welcome.
To invite other editors to this WikiProject, copy and past this template (with the signature):
You can feel free to contact us on the WikiProkect Physiology talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. You can also put your suggestions there and discuss the scope of participation.
Hoping for your cooperation! DiptanshuTalk 12:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia'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 Wikipedia. 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)
Hi Rytyho, I looked over this page today, so I'll tell you what I think. My first question is about the sentence in the history section discussing the Master of Science in Health Professions Education. What is this degree and what is its purpose? Regarding the pet hospital, I'm not sure about its notability. Do you believe there are enough news articles/media references to possibly create a Wikipedia page about the Banfield pet hospital? Also, I think the paragraph about Western's accolades (e.g., from the Chronicle on Higher Education) and other rankings could be its own section instead of under history since these are recent awards and rankings. The economic development part/impact on the community should stay in the history section IMO. If you can find more updated sources (I see one from 1995 for example) that also support this, that of course would be a place to improve the article. In the inter professional section, it is unclear whose understanding is supposed to be improved with inter professional education. I take it the intended meaning is that members of the health professions will learn about other health professions. Is that correct? Also, regarding the part saying IPE is being considered for incorporation into clinical grand rounds, is this specific to Western? The reference is a JAOA article, so I'm wondering if there are any news articles specifically discussing Western's take on this. Are there any such articles you can find? References verifying NIH funding, OneSight Foundation, and Potts Foundation funding would be a good addition as well (non-Western sources if possible, these tend to be looked upon more favorably/as more reliable since they're non-primary sources). Under the patient care section, should patient care centers be capitalized as it is in the first sentence here: "Western University of Health Sciences has two Patient Care Centers, one is located in Rancho Cucamonga, California, and the other is in Pomona, California on the main university campus." I'm thinking not. Who calls the south building "The Daumier"? Students? Faculty? Someone else? Is this notable enough to mention in the article? Overall, I think the article is a very thorough look at Western and needs tightening in just a few places and perhaps a couple more sources. Otherwise, I think you might be ready to go for GA! TylerDurden8823 (talk) 21:32, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi TylerDurden8823, thank you for the feedback! As far as the questions you raise:
1. The MS in health professions education degree is supposed to help provide educational skills to health professionals who are interested in teaching. Usually, there is no formal training required for teaching at health professions programs, beyond the completion of the program itself (medical/pharmacy/dental school, etc).
2. I do no think the pet hospital is notable enough to warrant its very own unique wikipedia article, but I think it does deserve coverage on this page, and the vet school's page too. As a whole, the Banfield system is large, and has its own wiki article. I do think that article is justified. Your thoughts?
3. I will work on looking for third party sources for funding. I think I could find them for at least most of the research funding. That is a good point; independent sources are always better.
4. The IPE grand rounds, which are still in development, are specific to WesternU. The JAOA specifically discusses WesternU's take on IPE. There might be a news article or two out there... I'll look. And yes, the IPE program is supposed to improve health professionals' understanding of each others' roles and responsibilities, so that they work together as a team more effectively.
5. To my knowledge, everyone (students/faculty/etc) calls the building "the Daumier." I included it because it is has on-campus student housing, so it improves the completeness of the article. I think it's worth mentioning, without going into excessive detail about it. Do you agree?
6. As far as changing "Patient Care Center," to lowercase - that seems fine to me.
Thanks again for your feedback! Rytyho usa (talk) 01:28, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Okay, your response definitely answered the few questions I had about the article. I do think it should be made a bit clearer who refers to the building as the Daumier since this is not general knowledge. Regarding the pet hospital, that's okay, that was really more of a curiosity question on my part. I think the Master of Science in Health Professions Education (first discussed in the history section) could be a bit clearer. I understand exactly what it is now that you've clarified, but I think the article could make it clearer as well since this again may not be general knowledge. I know a Master's degree like that is not necessarily unique and there are other ones similar to it I'm sure, but they may go by different names. If the JAOA article directly discusses WesternU's take on it, that's fine, but I agree that it's a good idea to search for other sources as well and the same goes for the search for independent sources discussing the research funding. That's always a plus if you can find it. Let me know if you have any more questions or need any more help with anything. I'm sure this will be a GA in no time. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 06:37, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.
The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.
Hi Rytyho, how's it going? What's new amigo? TylerDurden8823 (talk) 04:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi TylerDurden! I've been fairly busy this past month, as you may have noticed, but life is good. How about you? Rytyho usa (talk) 02:11, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm keeping busy too. Glad to hear life is good for you. Any luck on getting a review for the Western University of Health Sciences article? TylerDurden8823 (talk) 00:11, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
No, not at this point. Someone gave me some feedback on a few quick-fail items, after just glancing at the article. I've fixed those by now, but nobody has opened the review process yet. It looks like several GA nominations are from as far back as January, Feb, March of this year, so it might be a while. Rytyho usa (talk) 01:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
This is the first of a series of newsletters for Wikiproject Medicine's Translation Task Force. Our goal is to make all the medical knowledge on Wikipedia available to the world, in the language of your choice.
note: you will not receive future editions of this newsletter unless you *sign up*; you received this version because you identify as a member of WikiProject Medicine
Spotlight - Simplified article translation
Wikiproject Medicine started translating simplified articles in February 2014. We now have 45 simplified articles ready for translation, of which the first on African trypanosomiasis or sleeping sickness has been translated into 46 out of ~100 languages. This list does not include the 33 additional articles that are available in both full and simple versions.
Our goal is to eventually translate 1,000 simplified articles. This includes:
We are looking for subject area leads to both create articles and recruit further editors. We need people with basic medical knowledge who are willing to help out. This includes to write, translate and especially integrate medical articles.
What's happening?
IEG grant
CFCF - "IEG beneficiary" and editor of this newsletter.
I've (CFCF) taken on the role of community organizer for this project, and will be working with this until December. The goals and timeline can be found here, and are focused on getting the project on a firm footing and to enable me to work near full-time over the summer, and part-time during the rest of the year. This means I will be available for questions and ideas, and you can best reach me by mail or on my talk page.
Wikimania 2014
For those going to London in a month's time (or those already nearby) there will be at least one event for all medical editors, on Thursday August 7th. See the event page, which also summarizes medicine-related presentations in the main conference. Please pass the word on to your local medical editors.
Integration progress
There has previously been some resistance against translation into certain languages with strong Wikipedia presence, such as Dutch, Polish, and Swedish. What was found is that thre is hardly any negative opinion about the the project itself; and any such critique has focused on the ways that articles have being integrated. For an article to be usefully translated into a target-Wiki it needs to be properly Wiki-linked, carry proper citations and use the formatting of the chosen target language as well as being properly proof-read. Certain large Wikis such as the Polish and Dutch Wikis have strong traditions of medical content, with their own editorial system, own templates and different ideas about what constitutes a good medical article. For example, there are not MEDRS (Polish,German,Romanian,Persian) guidelines present on other Wikis, and some Wikis have a stronger background of country-specific content.
Swedish Translation into Swedish has been difficult in part because of the amount of free, high quality sources out there already: patient info, for professionals. The same can be said for English, but has really given us all the more reason to try and create an unbiased and free encyclopedia of medical content. We want Wikipedia to act as an alternative to commercial sources, and preferably a really good one at that. Through extensive collaborative work and by respecting links and Sweden specific content the last unintegrated Swedish translation went live in May.
Dutch Dutch translation carries with it special difficulties, in part due to the premises in which the Dutch Wikipedia is built upon. There is great respect for what previous editors have created, and deleting or replacing old content can be frowned upon. In spite of this there are success stories: Anafylaxie.
Polish Translation and integration into Polish also comes with its own unique set of challenges. The Polish Wikipedia has long been independent and works very hard to create high quality contentfor Polish audience. Previous translation trouble has lead to use of unique templates with unique formatting, not least among citations. Add to this that the Polish Wikipedia does not allow template redirects and a large body of work is required for each article. (This is somewhat alleviated by a commissioned Template bot - to be released). - List of articles for integration
Arabic The Arabic Wikipedia community has been informed of the efforts to integrate content through both the general talk-page as well as through one of the major Arabic Wikipedia facebook-groups: مجتمع ويكيبيديا العربي, something that has been heralded with great enthusiasm.
Integration guides
Integration is the next step after any translation. Despite this it is by no means trivial, and it comes with its own hardships and challenges. Previously each new integrator has needed to dive into the fray with little help from previous integrations. Therefore we are creating guides for specific Wikis that make integration simple and straightforward, with guides for specific languages, and for integrating on small Wikis.
Instructions on how to integrate an article may be found here [3]
News in short
To come
Medical editor census - Medical editors on different Wikis have been without proper means of communication. A preliminary list of projects is available here.
Orphaned non-free image File:Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine logo.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 14:12, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Assistance appreciated
Hi, Thank you for all your efforts on Wikipedia. I happened to stumble on one of the articles and saw your contributions. I see that you are an avid contributor in the medical field. I'd love for you to help me out on some of the articles that I've created also. You can visit my profile page where I've been recently working on American Orthodontists in the earlier 20th century. Thank you
Hgcool23 (talk) 17:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Absolutely; I will have a look a your pages. Thanks for contributing! Rytyho usa (talk) 16:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Virginia Tech Project Invite
As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Virginia Tech, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Virginia Tech. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!
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) 16:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Nova Southeastern
A person using various IP addresses has been rewriting or removing the identical content six times in the past week on several pages and I was only restoring the page to how it appeared before the vandalism. You reverted one of those edits after reverting mine. He edited the page before your edit and again after you reverted my edit at a different IP. A couple other editors and myself have been doing blanket reverts on all these instances of vandalism. I apologize for not verifying that your edit was true and correct first. Msjraz64 (talk) 06:21, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
No worries; thank you for helping correct vandalism! Rytyho usa (talk) 15:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
WVSOM Indebtedness
Please do not continue to undo the edits which have removed the incorrect data cited by US News on WVSOM's wikipedia page. The correct indebtedness of graduates to date is found in the 2016 AACOMAS CIB, and WVSOM is not even in the top 3 schools with students graduating with the highest debt.
Please double check your references, as well as the sources they cite, before using them. In this case, US News has cited either incorrect or outdated information, and the US News article cited for this claim is both flat out wrong, and incredibly misleading to the general public. US News has been contacted regarding this oversight and has yet to comment.
Feedback on Central Washington University edits
Thank you for getting back to me. I'll try the things you suggested in order to update the Central Washington University entry.
Richmoreno (talk) 19:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Rich
Hello, Rytyho usa. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Orphaned non-free image File:Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine logo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine logo.jpg. 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).
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Rytyho usa. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Orphaned non-free image File:University of Washington School of Public Health.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:University of Washington School of Public Health.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).
Hi. I noticed that back in 2012 you made several contributions to James Carville article. He is a frequent contributor to The National Memo, so I assume that you know this media (and the liberal press) quite well. The article has been undergoing dramatic edits and I ask for your assistance in editing/improving this article.
I while ago I was asked to make several minor edits to the article as paid editor. At that time the article had minimal content and was no more than a stub. I’ve added some information following the structure of such articles as Salon (website), HuffPost, Politico adding infobox, improving categories and adding some well-referenced info. The article started to look like a normal website/media article. After that it got heavily edited in two waves by editors deleting large chunks of well-written (ok, my personal view :)) and well-referenced information. I believe that some of these edits/deletions are extraneous and actually make the article worse/less useful to Wikipedia users. I also believe that The National Memo article has an undisputable notability. There is an interesting discussion about this at the article’s Talk page.
A lot of what is going all around this article is plain nonsense. So if you are interested in the subject / in improving the article, please take a look at January 10th version or January 29th version. Also if you have any suggestions on improving the article, please share. Thank you in advance. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 21:42, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Clark College logo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Clark College logo.jpg. 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).
Thanks for uploading File:Aria Health logo.gif. 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).
Hello, Rytyho usa. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
...Support Open Access... 
.jpg){kind=link}
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 01:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
; see Talk:Western University of Health Sciences for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 02:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Western University of Health Sciences for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TLSuda -- TLSuda (talk) 22:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
