Talk:Smoke inhalation

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Smoke inhalation.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Gasdoc1991 (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 October 2021 and 20 November 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gasdoc1991. Peer reviewers: DrFRahlouni.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't be referencing Indian websites, please reference reputable sources! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.5.172 (talk) 23:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--what does it matter that its Indian if the information is correct? --Dasbrick (talk) 20:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I am a 4th year medical student and will be making edits to update the page making it more robust in content with quality references. Thanks! Gasdoc1991 (talk) 13:18, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Gasdoc1991[reply]

I finished the initial bulk of my edits to get this page going in the right direction and with quality sources cited. I upgraded article quality from start to C. If you disagree, feel free to change and give feedback as to why. Thanks! Gasdoc1991 (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Smoke inhalation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071012055327/http://edoctor.co.in:80/smokeinhalationinj/4522628104 to http://www.edoctor.co.in/smokeinhalationinj/4522628104

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:22, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Locking this article

Can someone please lock this article? People are using it to make edits relating to This Is Us, and while it’s a great show, it’s not what this page is about. Cameronszachta (talk) 05:00, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Nearly every time I refresh the history I either see 'User undid revision' or 'updated since my last visit'. It's getting out of hand. AllyGebies (talk) 05:09, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Long live Jack Pearson! Glad NBC This Is Us (TV series)] took smoke detectors and inhalation to the mainstream! But Please, stop editing and adding comments. If you want a smoke inhalation media promotion section, use the talk pages here or for This Is Us and make valid points for editors to consider like 45,000,000 households (or whatever the post Super Bowl viewership ended up being, watched and were reminded to change their smoke alarm batteries. P37307 (talk) 05:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know that people love a particular show or movie, and are sad when a character dies, but vandalizing the page is not needed. It is getting really annoying. AllyGebies (talk) 05:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree greatly. I am a huge fan of This Is Us, but if we want people to take this topic seriously, we need to lock this article so people can stop vandalizing this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.35.49.169 (talk) 15:53, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review for smoke inhalation

Whose work are you reviewing?
Gasdoc1991

Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
Smoke inhalation

Lead: Clear and easy to understand. Great expansion of lead and summary of topic.
Content: Relevant to topic and up-to-date. Addition of epidemiology and mechanism tied in well.
Tone and Balance: Article is written in a neutral and non-biased tone.
Sources and references: Relevant sources were used and links work.
Organization: Sections of article are well organized in a logical structure, and important aspects of the topic were addressed.
Images and media: No images added, but pictures could be helpful. Adding to the infobox may be beneficial.
Overall, great work! Strengths demonstrated by this article are the addition of information to the underdeveloped sections and breadth of information covered. I would suggest adding to the infobox and consider adding a section on prevention.

DrFRahlouni (talk) 22:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]