Talk:Wiki Project Med

Please add new topics to the bottom of this page. Note: this is not the place to suggest changes to Wikipedia itself. If you have concerns or questions regarding medical content please post them on the talk page of the WikiProject Medicine in the appropriate language. English is here

This is a proposal for a research project to study the relationship between Wikipedia and the information needs of doctors. The community's knowledge and feedback is more than appreciated! — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richardpullicino (talk) 19:43, 30 March 2014 (UTC) Reply

The conference just ended. I'll write a summary over the next few days. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

Thanks User:Daniel Mietchen Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

Sorry that the report took longer — I had been waiting for a detailed report that I knew was being prepared by Pine. This is available now as a draft and scheduled to come out in next week's Signpost. He attended on behalf of another user group (Cascadia Wikimedians), so his perspective on the event was similar to mine in many aspects. For him, "the most significant developments and topics of discussion at the conference were":

• Lila's supportive approach to affiliates
• Strong interest in getting more support from WMF for user groups
• Concern about volunteer burnout
• Concern about online civility
• Interest in developing more and improved tools for program evaluation
• Frustration with administrative workloads for volunteers
• Interest among affiliates about networking with each other to achieve common goals

That basically fits with my perceptions, though I would order some of those points differently. To skim his report, I recommend searching for "thematic", "user group" or "affiliate", but the piece is well worth reading as a whole and rich in links to further details.

The conference was strongly geared towards chapters, and almost all sessions were framed in terms of "local" or "regional" activities rather than thematic ones, but if thematic issues surfaced, Wiki Project Med often served as the poster child, since many attendees seemed to be somewhat aware of our activities. If thematic perspectives did not come up on their own, I found myself pointing out again and again that many of the things that had been discussed in a particular session could be reframed by replacing "local" or "regional" with "thematic", or by adding a thematic spin to location-based activities like edit-a-thons.

Some of the most interesting sessions in my view:

• Lightning talks
• Regional cooperation
• What could local organizations bring to the movement?

These were complemented by a number of meetups, most of which unfortunately taking place in parallel, so I only managed to attend two:

• Wikimedia Conference 2015/Social events/WMCEE meetup, where it became clear that many of the WMCEE activities could be given a medical spin if someone were to take the lead on this; it was also suggested that activities co-organized in collaboration with thematic organizations could become part of a chapter's annual plan as part of their FDC grant proposals; both points resonated well in discussions with representatives from outside CEE
• Wikimedia user groups meetup, where it became clear that many user groups face similar problems, so that more intensive exchange would be useful; in particular, there were four user groups that have no geographic focus, and they are now linked via Wikimedia diaspora organisations; it was also discussed whether non-chapter affiliates could become part of the existing affiliates mailing list.

I managed to talk to representatives from almost all affiliates and encouraged them to keep thematic organizations like Wiki Project Med in mind when planning their activities, and had the opportunity to discuss the Translation task force with several of them, including the Taiwan and Nepali chapters. I was in turn encouraged by positive feedback from people at affiliates, WMF (including Lila), AffCom and FDC about our work.

One thing I discussed with many and where no good solution is in sight is what to do with cases like the Ebola task force, which had to operate in areas where there are no local affiliates, nor good WMF contacts. Related discussions, especially with the representatives from Nepal, triggered thoughts on how we might best establish some procedures and infrastructure to be better prepared to react to the next epidemic, earthquake or other disaster. This links well to a related interest of mine, which concerns open approaches in the framework of emergency responses, on which I am collecting thoughts here.

Overall, I think this Wikimedia Conference was a good opportunity to raise awareness of the potential and challenges of organizing Wikimedia activities around a theme rather than (or in addition to) a location, and it was more effective at that than the one I attended in 2013, when thematic orgs were a very new concept. We should definitely try to follow up on this when meeting with other affiliates and volunteers again, especially at Wikimania. For next year's Wikimedia Conference, it would be good to have non-chapter affiliates involved in the program and perhaps to have at least some sessions structured around themes rather than localities.

-- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:01, 26 June 2015 (UTC) Reply

Is there any plan to consolidate "Health and Medicine" list along the lines of the Wiki Project Medicine roster? For instance dump Alzheimer's from the Golden 1000 list and include depression, COPG ... (take your pick) instead. Regards - SmozBleda talk 00:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I am busy putting together a list of 1000 medical articles. Basically working to improve the leads of important topics and then working with Translators Without Borders and other to get them into other languages.

Alzheimer's is a disease of top importance. Have replaced penicillin with COPD. Cholera should really be gastroenteritis. We will see if these changes stick.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

Changes should have been made here. I made some alterations in the anatomy section as well, would like to make more. I feel it's very likely the changes will go through. CFCF (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees . Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Board will continue during the voting.

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is the ultimate governing authority of the Wikimedia Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization registered in the United States. The Wikimedia Foundation manages many diverse projects such as Wikipedia and Commons.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 17 to 23:59 UTC May 31. Click here to vote. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 17:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC) • Translate • Get help

We are now a tax exempt in the United States, with many thanks to Ralph Coti.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

Excellent work. Congratulations to all. JFW (talk) 09:37, 28 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

! Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

In case anyone here would like to comment, I've opened a discussion about the above at en:Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)#Industry funding and ghostwriting of sources, with a view to adding something to the guideline. Sarah (SV) ^talk 22:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

Its hard to pick up but is a concerning practice. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:46, 31 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

For what it's worth, the "GLAM Night Out" session at Wikimania 2012 featured an excellent panel discussion on this topic. Charles Ornstein of Propublica -- a publication that has done good work on stuff like this -- was particularly compelling. I don't think there was video or audio, but the page contains some info that might be of interest: http://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM_Night_Out -Pete F (talk) 03:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

I wanted to check in about the name of this organization. There has always been some confusion about this. The last public discussion about this was a few years ago at Talk:WikiProject_Med/Archives/2013#Please_choose_another_name.

To review -

• The legal registered name of this organization is WIKIPROJECT MED FOUNDATION, INC.
• This organization most commonly goes by "Wiki Project Med" or "Wiki Project Med Foundation"
• "Wikimedia Medicine" was the first proposed name for this organization, but was excluded because of a prohibition on using the trademarked term "Wikimedia" and legal regulations about using the term "medicine"
• "WikiProject Medicine" is the name for each separate community forum for discussing health content in the network of Wikimedia projects
• In the linked discussion above, "Wiki Med" is discouraged by the Wikimedia Foundation because they feel that "Wiki Med" seems like "Wikimedia"

I have raised the name issue in private correspondence in the past, advocating for thoughtfulness in choosing a single name with a single spelling so that the efforts of this group would have consistent branding and the consistent online use which would support good search engine indexing.

Just recently, participants in this project released a web app which is called "WikiMed Medical Encyclopedia". This might be a break from branding and might not be a good long-term name for this application.

I would like to call for confirmation of the primary name for this organization and for secondary names which might be used, if members feel like this organization needs multiple names. If anyone wants to propose a name change, this probably is not a good place to do that unless the person proposing a name change has already registered a domain. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Reply

Yes agree. We have gone through a few names. Now that we are an official user group we could request Wikimedia Med from the WMF.

The app is a product thus its name does not need to match that of this organization or the Wikiprojects. I was not directly involved with determining its current name but I assume we could request it changed if we have a better one in mind.

We also own the domain www.opentextbookofmedicine.com Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Reply

My preference is still for "Wikimedia Medicine", and as an affiliate, this should now be doable. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC) Reply

To assume membership on the board of trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation I am required to step down from the board of Wiki Project Med Foundation. Therefore as of July 15th, 2015 I propose Jacob de Wolff assume the role of president replacing me. (the voting below is for member of the board)

Support

• Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:32, 10 July 2015 (UTC) Reply
• RexxS (talk) 09:34, 10 July 2015 (UTC) Reply
• Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:08, 10 July 2015 (UTC) Reply
• Vinicius Siqueira (talk) 03:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC) Reply
• Peter.C (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2015 (UTC) Reply
• Biosthmors (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC) Reply

Abstain

• I don't think I can vote for myself, but I am aware of this vote and am happy to serve as president. JFW (talk) 18:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC) Reply

Oppose

Discuss