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

I haven't read much of it yet, but Programs:Evaluation portal/Library/Overview might have some ideas about how to self-evaluate your program to see where you can improve. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

Which program? You mean WPMEDF generally or the Translation Task Force (TTF) specifically? 24.66.53.18 11:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

This group is a collective of independent volunteers who complete tasks together but are not managed centrally. If any evaluation happened it would be of any given individual volunteer's action. For the Wikipedia Library, the Wikimedia Foundation funds someone to do certain things in partnership with others, so evaluation makes more sense for that program because there is at least one lead organizer who is accountable for funding. It is difficult to recognize what could be evaluated here or what utility that would have. What did you have in mind? Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC) Reply

I was thinking primarily about the TTF. I'm more interested in how well the group is supporting the translators (and other editors), and whether improvements could be made. Is anyone tracking numbers of editors, hours spent working, or the number of articles improved? Is the rate of translation going up or down? Is translation work being frustrated by any obstacles (like endless changes to the en.wp article)?

On a more general level, are new people being welcomed? Are editors being noticed or honored for their contributions? (I know that Doc James has some of this in the works.) Are group values (like MEDRS) being shared in practical but friendly and supportive ways with new editors? What's being done to promote a a sense of belonging to and achieving through the group rather than isolated, individual actions? (Lane, I think you'd find McMillan and Chavis's "Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory" from 1986 to be very interesting.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:03, 17 March 2014 (UTC) Reply

All excellent points. We are tracking progress here [1] but have not put progress into graphs. Thus not sure if rate of translation is changing.

Translation is based on a single version of the English Wikipedia article and is done is a work doc. Thus ongoing changes since a specific date are not reflected in the base document.

We are just for the first time looking at editor numbers for medicine. Agree we need to do more to recognize those within our community who are doing amazing work. TWB has some good systems in place to motivate people. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:12, 18 March 2014 (UTC) Reply

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!

I'd like to ask of you to take a look at a Wikimedia IEG grant a few of us over at Wikiproject Medicine as well as here are behind. You may likely have heard of the translation of medical articles that is being done (if not please take a look at w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Translation Task Force). The goal of the grant is to get the translation and integration process to run smoothly, and to assess which articles are the most important to translate. We've come far at w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Translation task force/RTT, but to get further we feel there is need for some form of organization, preferably by someone who can devote significant time to the task.

I'm very hopeful that I can provide real benefit with this grant, as there are so many articles on Wikipedia that could help people all over the world.
It's even more important when you take into account drives such as Wikipedia Zero, and readers who might not have access to any medical information at all can benefit.

Please take a look at the grant page: Medicine Translation Project Community Organizing, and add a comment or give your ideas on how we can best benefit the other Wikipedias.
Thanks, -- CFCF (talk) 21:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Reply

At London Wikimania 2014 the organizers are offering to make paper advertisements for people who request them. Wiki Project Med should propose something, right? I am not sure how these could be distributed but it would be nice to have a digital proof made for anyone to print themselves. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Reply

Meta:Babel#Translate wiki pages to another wiki has an announcement about a new tool that might benefit some of the translators here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

Wondering if there was anyone interested in leading this? While I know a bunch of us are working on projects it would be good to have a way of disseminating the work to others. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:39, 21 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

A newsletter under WPMED is currently being devised here: en:Wikipedia:The_Revival and will, ideally, be released at the end of the month. A fuller discussion is here: User_talk:Ocaasi#WP_Med_Newsletter_proposal. I have proposed moving it to the English-language WP as this is where the majority of our activities and user-base is, and because only a few users are aware of what is happening at a meta-level, so there are less users available to maintain it. --LT910001 (talk) 03:33, 25 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

Okay. We still want to be able to deleiver it to users in other languages though. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:54, 25 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

I'd like some things about WPMEDF addressed, which have arisen during our discussion at:

1. Is WPMEDF an umbrella organisation for the local WPMED communities?

WPMEDF does not have an authority over any local WPMED communities. It is a mechanism avaliable more for collaboration.

1. Have the local communities consented to this?
2. Is WPMEDF a coherent organisation or a group of one or two individuals who use this title when conducting their activities?
3. How are activities taking in the name of WPMEDF arranged and what say do the members have in this?
4. What is the role of members in WPMEDF and what role do they play in decision-making?
5. Is there any transparency in decision-making?
6. What funds are involved in the operation of WPMEDF, where do these arise from, and how are they distributed?

Our activities are almost entirely conducted in English-language, English-language publications are discussed, this page is only fully-translated in English, most of the board members come from the English language WP, and translation efforts translate from the ENWP to other sites, and I don't know of translation efforts in other directions.

1. What relationship does WPMEDF have to the English-language WPMED?
2. Are there examples where the flow of information from the english-language to other languages is not unidirectional?

I support the mission of WPMEDF but I do think there are some questions which need to be formally addressed. --LT910001 (talk) 02:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

Sure great questions:

1. Is WPMEDF an umbrella organisation for the local WPMED communities?

   WPMEDF does not have any authority over any local WPMED communities. It is a plateform available to improve collaboration between languages and from which to do real life outreach. It is also a place where chapters can turn for further help / feedback on medicine related projects.

   Have the local communities consented to this?

   We currently have ~100 members from 20 plus languages. As this organization does not have authority over local communities explicit consent prior to its existence is not really needed IMO. All communities were however contacted before the organization was formed.

   Is WPMEDF a coherent organisation or a group of one or two individuals who use this title when conducting their activities?

   We are running about a dozen projects. There are a few very active participants and a larger number of less active ones. A similar pattern to that of Wikipedia itself.

   How are activities taking in the name of WPMEDF arranged and what say do the members have in this?

   Activities are discussed here on these pages. All are free to discuss them. Like in other places of Wikimedia people often take on projects per WP:BRD and discussion / consensus takes place if issues arise

   What is the role of members in WPMEDF and what role do they play in decision-making?

   Members are welcomed to become involved with any of the discussions taking place here. Our membership person on the board has become busy with other activities and thus we are needing to find a new one to finalize the membership process. Membership will eventually vote on the board of directors.

   Is there any transparency in decision-making?

   Much decision making takes place here so yes.

   What funds are involved in the operation of WPMEDF, where do these arise from, and how are they distributed?

   The costs of the organization have included some form fees. I have donated these. We have a lawyer donating his time. There are no funding. In some of the collaborations, the collaborating organization has covered the travel expenses of the Wikipedians involved.

   Our activities are almost entirely conducted in English-language

   Not entirely true. We of course are involved in translating content into 50 plus languages. I have been recently to Iran to meet with local Wikipedians as well as Italy where I spoke at a Cochrane collaboration conference, meet with local Wikipedians and presenting at the launch of a new Italian digital library. One interesting thing I learned is that all Cochrane reviews are published in English.

   What relationship does WPMEDF have to the English-language WPMED?

   Beyond many of the members being active on English WPMED there is no formal relationship.

   Are there examples where the flow of information from the english-language to other languages is not unidirectional?

   Have recently gained access to Prescrire, an excellent source of systematic reviews from France, published originally in French and than translated into English. But as per the Cochrane example medicine is a very English dominated language.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:28, 28 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

• I have always expressed interest in being a member of Wiki Project Med without being on its board. What James said is what I have always understood the organization to be. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2014 (UTC) Reply

Comment: re: ...as per the Cochrane example medicine is a very English dominated language. Well, in medical research, and in science generally, English is very much the lingua franca that facilitates international (interlanguage) communication. Whether that can be characterized as "domination" is another matter. It certainly raises many practical issues (and native writers of English almost inevitably tend to have a head start in getting their work published). The need for dissemination of research knowledge into different languages through impartial, non-industry sources is a relevant concern. Unsurprisingly, Cochrane has its own translation projects.

As regards flow of information across different Wikipedias, it seems to me that the situation is somewhat complicated by the fact that different languages have different sets of editorial guidelines.
MistyMorn (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC) Reply

I'm coming on the last day (Sunday). I know James will be there. Anyone else going? JFW (talk) 11:24, 13 June 2014 (UTC) Reply