Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:20, 23 June 2006

Misplaced Pages:Wikimedia for Nobel Peace Prize

A project page you created a while back, Misplaced Pages:Wikimedia for Nobel Peace Prize, has been nominated for deletion at WP:MFD. I have suggested that the page be moved to user space. Would you be interested in keeping it in your user space? Please feel free to comment at its subpage. Thanks. --TantalumTelluride 04:43, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

One can include it in Nobel Prize page.

Discussion on Template:User green energy

Please take a note of the request at Template:User green energy's talk page. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 18:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

See also links

I found some of your recent additions odd, as have other editors:

1. Additional topic links in obstetrics & gynecology 'see also' lists odd, yet you sort them into alphabetical order.

Like in a lot of other articles, the alphabetical order is an order minimum.

1. • Midwife is a sensible article to point out for obsetrics,

I do not know this concept.

but not gynaecology.

A midwife nurse is an obstetric-gynecologic specialist.

1. • Obstetrics gynecology nursing

Yes, this is the right name also for a lot of midwives´ work.

seems a made up expression for which you created as redirect page that points to Obstetrics.

You can write the Obstetrics gynecology nursing article if you want. But a red link is not a good beginning point. Obstetrics links to gynecology in "see also". But you are free to improve the Obstetrics gynecology nursing or redirect to midwife.

1. The sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome redirection page:
   • Mis-spelt twice (term does extist on PubMed searching) and so I have moved to sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome.

You mis-spelled in this same page with obsetrics (?).

1. • I am unclear quite what this is compared to apnea or sleep apnea - to which one should it redirect ?
   • I changed the redirect to sleep apnea and thus it that article removed the reduncant link to sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome - please see talk:sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome.

To sleep apnea. But, this is not the perfect solution. This is a apnea and a HYPOPNEA, no only apnea. See the talk page.

1. Mini PE - you add a link to a general download site that does not have 'Mini PE' listed on its front page, yet correctly wikify some of the text.

The name is wrong. Really is MiniPE. I have added a link to a torrent.

1. (Possible) Copyvio - you just created Event Data Recorder which immediaely had another editr place a copyvio warning on

You did not see the reference link. I can include original text and add comments. Or change a little bit the original text.

I had on reverting the medical topics links (as above) been uncertain as to your intensions. On trying to assume good faith they certainly did not seem to be blatant vandalism, but instead seemed just ill-thought out. I had a look at some of your previous recent contributions (which seem to be on computing or transport topics) and all of these seem positive additional cross links or clarifications edits. So your recent edits seem out of keeping to your past editing style... David Ruben 00:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

With this name or anonymously I have contributed to improve Misplaced Pages. I assume you too. But I really think talk about illness is not a prudence starting. And prudence and respect is a must be between wikipedians. --Mac 07:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed- "ill-thought out" only a comment on specific edits, not intended to mean nor imply any suggestion of "illness" on you as editor. Hence I had spent a some time looking at a seletion of your wider edits before writing to you, and I had been impressed by your contributions. The edits of that particular day therefore seemed atypical.

Yes, only from time to time I have enough time to invest in Misplaced Pages as it merits.

As for Obstetrics gynecology nursing, probably should redirect to general topic of nursing.

Perhaps with an specific reference to midwife

I wonder if this a US specific term, as in UK midwives are nurses who have undergone additional training (so all midwives are nurses, but not all nurses are midwives).

Like in Spain. I think this is going to be more and more similar everyday because of the European Space of Higher Education and university common cataloge.

Hence no plain "nurse" can work in UK on an obsetric labour unit (except in surgical theatres as theatre nurses). Similarly Gynaecology wards are generally staffed by non-midwifery-trained nurses (there is sufficient shortages of midwives that they are all exclusively utilised on obstetric wards only). Perhaps in US there is less distinction between Obstetrics & Gynaecology service provision than in UK where the only cross-over staff are the doctors servicing both sets of outpatient clinics and inpatient beds (the nursing/midwife staff being distinct as are the wards) ? David Ruben 00:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

In Spain, midwives are called obstetric-gynecologic nurses . But in some countries, like Argentina, the midwives follows a different carrier of the nursing (specific midwife carrier). But they can homologate this argentinan diploma to spanish nursing diploma (homologate to spanish midwife diploma is difficult). And to work in some spanish territories, one ask for the nursing diploma and experience in obstetric-gynecologic nursing (this experience can be the original argentinan midwife diploma or certified experience in a specialized hospital service). Regards. --Mac 08:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

• So, if I understand correctly, Obstetrics gynecology nursing is the Spanish term for UK/US Midwife.

• Sure.

• In which case, should it redirect to 'midwife' ?

• Ever. Because, generally, in Spain a midwife is a Obstetrics gynecology nurse. It must be for ever a nurse and work in this speciality field.

• Midwife then needs an extra section explaining the term 'Obstetrics gynecology nursing' as being used in Spain ?

• Yes, I would add a section about midwifery in Spain (like equivalent to Obstetrics gynecology nursing]] only.

• Given you seem to know about the system in Spain/Argentina, can you add the necessary information ? Are there any references that can be given for this that will be in English (vs Spanish which would be less helpful in this English Misplaced Pages) ? David Ruben 12:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

• Of course I can add this information. But I think the system used in Argentina is similar in other Hispanoamerican countries (i.e. Ecuador). I can give this information in english (translating the official spanish papers). Regards.--Mac 06:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Red link

I noticed that you turned Red link into a redirect to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Red Link Recovery. While perhaps useful (even if we do tend to frown upon cross-namespace redirects), doing so has one major disadvantage: it makes the link no longer red. I have accordingly deleted the page so that it displays as a red link again. (See also Talk:Red link.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 11:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)