Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Featured articles review

message: Should we create to-do lists on these articles' talk page? Maybe it could help the work. NCurse work 08:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if that will help:  there doesn't seem to be anyone interested in doing the work.  And, on the autism article, there is pronounced opposition to removing the original research, organizing the articles medically, or including peer-reviewed medical information, so a To Do list isn't likely to get addressed.  If you think a To Do list will help, I'll add comments to it.  I've never done a ToDo list:  don't know where the box is or how to use it.  Sandy 11:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just put  on the article's talk page and save. Then click on edit in the created box and list your suggestions. Hard to find people for these kind of works. I work now on Huntington's disease and Wikiproject medical genetics. Hard to join, but I'll try as much as I can. Just give me time. NCurse work 11:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'll get to those as I can:  thanks for the instructions!  Sandy 11:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I've included all but Race into Wikipedia Release Version 0.5. NCurse  work 14:32, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To-do lists 

message: I reorganized the page. What do you think? Maybe now I'll concentrate on articles lacking citations. NCurse  work 13:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Better, but Race is also complete now.  It would sure be nice if we could get some more WikiPhysicians interested in maintaining the FA standards on current FAs. Sandy 13:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I see you've now gotten that too - much better!  Sandy 13:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New structure 

message: Dear colleagues—This week, it's all about how reviewing at these locations are critical to maintaining WP's high standards, and the other advantages of being a reviewer. Here's the link:
Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches
We're happy for the word to be spread, since we need more reviewers; if you have a mind to review, please drop in. Tony (talk) 08:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP Signpost on FAC and FAR/C reviewing 

message: I would appreciate commentary and critique on whether the current action potential article is worthy to be a Featured Article.  It's a long article, I know, but please read through it and vote your conscience, Keep or Remove, at its FAR.  If you don't like it, then let me know what needs to be fixed! Willow (talk) 19:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Willow, as far as I've been able to tell, I'm the only editor who follows this page (so you might want to post at WP:MED :-)  Also, GimmeBot is going to be out for three days, so I don't know if Marskell plans to do any closings at FAR.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm watching. But there's not much to watch. Colin°Talk 19:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Informed assessment of [[Action potential]] as a Featured Article

message: A doctor choosing a bone scan for discovering nerve damage or ligament damage. Any precedent, success or a WAG methodology.71.202.22.45 (talk) 05:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea what you actually want to know, and why you are asking it here. You may want the reference desk. JFW | T@lk 11:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  bone scan-nerve damage