lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Allan Ramsay (artist)

message: With that said, I think it fair to say that this man's life was extraordinary. The figure's eyes on some of his works are odd, yet attractive. Cartoon-like, yet not offensive or obscene.
Tom Laverty II 05:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not the Greatest Painter, But What a Painter! 

message: Ramsay could achieve photographic depictions of items (such as lace) at which others in England could only marvel. Not for nothing was he the King's favourite artist. Indeed, you only have to checkout the stubble on his self-portrait shown on this article to appreciate how singularly talented he was. Needless to say that if he'd been English rather than Scottish, he would be known as "England's greatest portrait painter" today. Nevertheless, he is undeniably Scotland's greatest and was a worthy member of the Scottish Enlightenment. And going by the self-portrait, he was also as cute as a button!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.246.21 (talk) 19:07, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  easily GB's greatest portrait painter - and smartest - and cutest! 

message: "The pair of portaits of David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau by Alan Ramsay, painted in London in 1776, are widely recognised as being among the finest mature works of a great portraitist."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.246.21 (talk) 19:21, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  By Nigel Warburton 

message: The paintings section mention he has work in "the Glasgow Museum" - these is no such place that I know of. Not sure if they meant to write Glasgow museums (plural) or the Kelvingrove Museum, which I couldn't see noted in the citation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:70B0:4F00:DC82:8552:B8:8305 (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glasgow Museum?
Talk:Body donation

message: I would like to make a few edits and additions to the lead section of the body donation article. These include making sure all links for other relevant names for body donation are included, as well as links to organ donation and tissue donation. Most of the information in this lead section summarizes body donation well, but some of the language can be changed and a few details can be added to further define the summary of the subject. For example, not all body donation programs pay for full funeral arrangements after, but most provide something (like a stipend) to cover some costs. I would like to make sure none of the information in the summary is misleading. 107.147.228.50 (talk) 01:10, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions/Edits to Lead Section  

message: Karnataka[edit]
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2016)
The earlier Mysore Anatomy Act' now Karnataka Anatomy Act 1957, amended 200111 has also eased the legalities & difficulties towards body donation & procuring cadavers which is a principal teaching tool for anatomists and medical educators teaching gross anatomy, there by reducing the shortage of cadavers in medical college which gives a practical, real feel, hands on experience for students & dissectors thus reducing the pitch for virtual dissection. Act has led to promote body donation programs & increasing awareness among the general public in their surrounding districts.
The body donation program has encouraged public to donate bodies after death of their beloved ones for the cause of science & society, or register as prospective donors so the nearest/ legal heirs would donate after death, respectable transportation and receipt of the dead bodies. The program is run by various medical colleges of Karnataka, spreading awareness & promote attitude towards body donation, it has not only encouraged body donation also various organ donations.
Hassan[edit]
Anatomy department maintains the body donation registry at Hassan Institute of medical sciences, the prospective donor can avail the application form/ Consent form / No objection form. Duly filled form should be submitted along with the relevant ID documents. Donor ID card is issued.[citation needed]
I have removed these sections temporarily because there are no citations for the information. I was unable to trace the information to a website or article. If someone can find these, they may add them back in with the proper citations! Fungrach (talk) 16:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temporary removal of section
Talk:Boil-water advisory

message: The Emergency Alert System code for this emergency is a Boil Water Warning. Should the article be renamed? Should it give a mention to the EAS? --Delta1989 (talk/contributions) 22:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It should stay as Boil water advisory (but without the hyphen).  That is the most popular usage.  It is also called boiled water notice sometimes. Drinkingwaterdoc (talk) 20:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

text: It's just another alternative term to add to the lead; done. If it's addressed directly by EAS or SAME, they should probably be mentioned, with sources.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:42, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advisory vs Warning 

message: It is unclear, as in many articles, how to make this material "worldwide." Might be able to do this in two parts within the article by using subheadings "developed" countries and "developing" countries. Student7 (talk) 22:50, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally, no, since that assessment can be PoV-laden.  Wikipedia's normal approach, when there's enough material to even warrant it, is simply by-country sections.  At its present WP:STUB state, though, the thing to do is simply add material.  It may be a long time before there is so much that its needs geographical split-up.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:12, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Worldwide

message: Comment left by user SMcCandlish in the reason parameter of the globalize template:  157.157.113.97 (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globalize
Talk:Booster dose

message: Here is what I'm thinking for the introductory section--it would be great to get some feedback!
In medicine, a booster dose is an extra administration of a vaccine after an earlier (prime) dose. After initial immunization, a booster injection or booster dose is a re-exposure to the immunizing antigen cell. It is intended to increase immunity against that antigen back to protective levels after it has been shown to have decreased after a specified period. For example, tetanus shot boosters are often recommended every 10 years.[1] The need for a booster dose is evaluated in several ways, including the immune response after a booster dose is administered, active B and T cell activity after a certain amount of time that the primary vaccine was given, and prevalence of the disease in vaccinated populations.[2] Anamnestic response, the rapid production of antibodies after a stimulus of an antigen, is a typical way to measure the need for a booster dose of a certain vaccine. If anamneestic response is high after receiving a primary vaccine many years ago, there is most likely little to no need for a booster dose.[3]
If a patient receives a booster dose but already has a high level of antibody, then a reaction called an Arthus reaction could develop, a localized form of Type III hypersensitivity induced by high levels of IgG antibodies causing inflammation.[4] The inflammation is often self-resolved over the course of of a few days, but could be avoided altogether by increasing the length of time between the primary vaccine and the booster dose.[5]
It is not yet fully clear why some vaccines such as Hepatitis A and B are effective for life, and some such as tetanus need boosters. In most cases, the booster serves as a 'reminder' to the immune system. [6] This is especially pertinent if the immune system responds to a primary vaccine rapidly, so that the body does not have time to sufficiently develop immunological memory against the disease.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Immcarle11 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Boromycin

message: The last sentence is unfinished. Why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.163.197.224 (talk) 19:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  unfinished sentence? 

message: Article seems to be lifted from this abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=8695905&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum
Or  if that doesn't work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.168.196.29 (talk) 07:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Copyvio removed (I think). I made the edit without logging in, as 70.something. Check to see if it's okay now, if you could. Scythe33 03:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright
Talk:BrainMaps

message: It seems that since this article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, the article has already been deemed notable.  However, I have gone ahead and updated the BrainMaps page to include additional references, including Science and Discover magazine.   Medlat 17:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:Bronchoalveolar lavage

message: The article switches to BALF with no explanation. A mistake ? 192.114.175.2 (talk) 08:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  BAL/BALF 

message: I found a great picture of the procedure here, but I'm confused as to whether the public-domain nature of U.S. Federal Government websites allows content from other sites to retain copyright protections after being published on a U.S. Govt. website, as with that site's statement "Copyright 1997-2008, A.D.A.M., Inc. Any duplication or distribution of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited.". Is that copyright claim valid?
- Eric (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image copyrights 

message: Ref. 1 no longer links to anything unfortunately. I second the suggestion of including a figure of the actual procedure, as it would clarify aspects of the procedure that the text description doesn't convey. Tolchocker (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and Image 

message: What level or type of anæsthesia is used during this procedure?
173.79.225.11 (talk) 07:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  question? 

message: There is a flurry of articles coming from China advocating for the use of BAL in Mycoplasma pneumonia.  and its many references are useful examples. Apparently they do BAL in a cleansing role? Should it really be considered BAL, or just be filed under "bronchoscopy with BAL" like  does?? I mean, they are indeed lavaging something. Artoria2e5 🌉 01:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A huge 30-liter BAL as treatment for pulmonary alveolar proteinosis is described in StatPearls, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430762/. Gotta find out how much fluid they use for this stuff and whether we should file under whole lung lavage. Artoria2e5 🌉 01:50, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  BAL as treatment
Talk:Buddy wrapping

message: This article was tagged here for copyright investigation as duplicating this source. Evidence suggests that they duplicated us, rather than the other way around. The initial edit, from November 2006, contains approximately half of that external site. Several days later, a different editor added the words "or toe", here, bringing it closer to that source. Nearly half a year later, an IP editor expanded it significantly here, bringing it closer to that source again, but with sufficient differences that pasting is highly unlikely. Copy editing about a month after by another editor brought it closer. Given history of natural evolution, this one seems clear. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright concerns
Talk:Caloric reflex test

message: Techniques section is very confusing, they use the term "turn" of the eyes which isn't clear, since eyes cannot rotate on a vertical axis. They can however move about in a circular pattern ALONG the vertical as if revolving along a center point of origin.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.5.172 (talk) 06:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:
Talk:Cardiac fibrosis

message: Why is this page mostly devoted to serotonin?  This is completely inappropriate for a page about cardiac fibrosis.  Topics that should be discussed include collagen and collagen cross-linking, hypertrophy, aging, effects of this process on disease.  Almost none of the information on serotonin belongs in this article, and could be in a separate article entitled "the effects of serotonin ON cardiac fibrosis."  However, seeing as serotonin is not a primary cause or an integral aspect of cardiac fibrosis it does not explain what cardiac fibrosis is, and does not belong here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.105.4 (talk) 23:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  
Talk:Cardiac shunt

message: Does anyone know why there are separate stubs for right-to-left shunt & pulmonary-to-systemic shunt and left-to-right shunt & pulmonary-to-systemic shunt?  As far as I know, the difference is merely one of terms, not one of physiology, but this knowledge comes from a comparative physiological background, so there could be a difference used in the mammalian literature that I don't know about.  If no-one can give me a compelling reason to keep these 4 articles apart, I'll (eventually) turn them into two articles with some emphasis on comparative physiology.  I'm leaving the note here because there are so many articles affected, I'm assuming anyone watching those is also watching this page. Enuja 03:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Types

message: The entry doesn't even talk about what a "shunt" is or reference a page that would define  it.
--68.195.44.36 (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Define the term!
Talk:Cardiovascular technologist

message: Do cardiovascular technologists needs licenses to practise in US ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.172.180.122 (talk) 16:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  No  | pulmonological talk • contribs  01:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  16:59, 13 December 2010 
Talk:Caustic pencil

message: Mild re-write with new links and two references. Still need reference for procedure described. Could possibly use a {Template:Infobox drug}, but also could argue it's not a drug. BeadleB (talk) 05:05, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite with links & references 
Talk:William Aikman (painter)

message: This portrait of Lord Grange, as it appeared in this article from May 2010 to October 2012, is not by Aikman. It was sold by Christie's in 2010 for £750, and is described on their site as being of the Scottish School, painted circa 1750, some tweny years after Aikman's death.
Danny Sprinkle (talk) 14:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grange portrait not by Aikman
Talk:Cerebral shunt

message: The article seems to reflect the personal experience of a parent with a child who has hydrocephalus. Hence, it lacks sources and utterly neglects to discuss the use of shuntage in other neurological conditions from meningitis to IIH and back to neurotrauma. Needs work, guys. JFW | T@lk 19:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources and scope 

message: The Spitz-Holter shunt in my case contains non ferrous metal, which can interfere with the imaging during MRI scans of the head. I discovered this today during an MRI scan. Webhat (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spitz-Holter Shunt 

message: The section on types of shunt drainage did not include LP shunts, so I added that to the chart.Sdsures (talk) 17:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shunt routing - LP Shunts 

message: I suggest Lumbar-peritoneal shunt be merged here, since the material there overlaps with the material here. Facts707 (talk) 14:29, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: This page is about an internal shunt, whereas ventriculostomy is a type of external shunt. It should be mentioned the two categories and some information contrasting the two types.Dan AGuy (talk) 21:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contrast Internal and External shunts
Talk:Chain of survival

message: Communities with survival rates >20%??? What kind of communities are we talking about?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.239.54 (talk) 17:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

message: The references supporting the claim that Mary Newman introduced the concept are relatively old, and neither are indexed on Pubmed or available online. There are a number of secondary sources easily found to back this up, but I think the ideal one would be a WP:MEDRS-compatible secondary source. JFW | T@lk 09:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mary Newman
Talk:Evolution of butterflies

message: Wow, this is pretty bad.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.214.123 (talk) 07:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually this is pathetic.  If I knew anything about insect evolution I would help.  Also what biologist refers to themselves as an evolutionist? 74.192.200.82 (talk) 04:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

text: In my opinion this article should be deleted or rewritten.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.253.6.26 (talk) 19:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk 

message: Re-write put in place. Who will add the content and the refs? --Wloveral (talk) 01:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article re-written 

message: This article needs some major rewriting and working. I did a little that i hope will put this article in the right direction. Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-=  02:13, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: NEEDS WORK!

message: Hi, There is a thread here you may be interested in, about a consistent naming for articles dealing with evolution of taxa. Thanks! --Cyclopiatalk 17:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on title of taxon evolution pages
Talk:Chyme

message: The article says "...anaerobic bacteria which at the same time help to package the remains." Unless "package" has some very specific medical meaning (and if so, a link to another article about it might be called for), then this phrasing is puzzling. It creates the image of the bacteria putting something into boxes. Maybe this really is a good analogy for what is happening (I don't myself know) but if so, I think a little more explanatory text is called for. --Ericjs (talk) 18:33, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does "package" mean here?
Talk:Clinical data repository

message: This article was extremely informative regarding clinical data repository. I liked the use of examples, such as how CDR was used by Harvard Medical School, to further expand upon the concept. The article was well written and the authors employed good grammar. The article was also very easy to read and was well organized.Meganh1111 (talk) 15:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled
Talk:Brachydactyly type D

message: Is it really a disease? Yes, it is abnormal, like Cindy Crawford's mole on her lip, but it doesn't cause discomfort or dysfunction. My wife has two such thumbs and my son has one. Calling it a disease instead of genetics is unnecessarily making people with such traits feel ostracized.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.181.174.148 (talk) 14:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Disease?

message: I cannot find a credible reference (other than mirrored copies of this article) that proves a connection between Brachydactyly and royalty.  The reference given for the whole article "Abnormal Skeletal Phenotypes: From simple to complex diagnoses" can be searched, but does not turn up with the term "Royalty", "King" or "Queen".  I have marked the appropriate items with fact tags.  
However, another congenital anomaly, Polydactyly, seems to be related to royalty: "Polydactyly is the most common congenital anomaly of the upper limb. In England, it was believed to relate to royalty."  Kgrr (talk) 07:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: deleting this orig research fluffGinger.iphone (talk) 08:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Royal Trait?

message: "European thumb" ? Wow is that a nice jingostic pejorative. --IceHunter (talk) 16:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Labels 

message: [removed: BLP violation] #14  [removed: BLP violation]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.225.33.104 (talk) 06:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  fwiw 

message: This article cites a few studies: https://helix.northwestern.edu/blog/2011/11/curious-case-stubby-thumb
Someone with some time could look them up and add citations and more info to the article.
Tea and crumpets (talk) 05:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  More sources 

message: Make your hand to be strong 2409:4070:4512:5089:25E3:CE3C:8049:C8A3 (talk) 02:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  English
Talk:Cognitive impairment

message: You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of  Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by  suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the  Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence citations bibliography for updating this and other articles 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cognitive problem. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 08:22, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cognitive problem" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (please mention me on reply) 14:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Cognitive deficit →  – By far the more usual term. Cognitive deficit hardly registers on nGrams compared to impairment. Google search far more supportive of impairment. Also there is the term and page Mild cognitive impairment. Iztwoz (talk) 05:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

text: * Support. Agree with Iztwoz and their rationale. Tom (LT) (talk) 12:05, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 10 May 2023
Talk:Community-based clinical trial

message: This article describes research done through primary care physicians as "community-based clinical trials". That kind of research is normal and the most common kind of research, but it may not have been historically. If there were sources, this article's focus could be about the shift of research from institutions to personal doctors, but this is history.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 03:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Again community based tries are simply tries based done for community. For example tribal population etc. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Obsolete
Talk:Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties

message: The criticisms section was edited significantly by User:209.121.189.130.  This user may be in a conflict of interest (WP:COI), as the IP address 209.121.189.130 is linked to the CPhA (Canadian Pharmacists Association) which publishes the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties (CPS).(IP lookup of 209.121.189.130 -- cpha-mail.pharmacists.ca) Nephron  T|C 03:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms, apparent COI 