User talk:C Michael Gibson

Hi Dr Gibson; I have collected a lot of DICOM based videos (majority of them are complications) from our archieve. How I can make all those videos free of private infos to add?

You can crop the images to that the identifying information is gone or you can put a black box over the information (make sure the black box cannot be removed.)

Hello Michael, I hope the contributions from wikisurgery are ok.

I have put in more links today, covering toe amputation, anal fissure, anal fistula and anterior resection of rectum with total mesorectal excision.

Some are added to wikidoc pages, some are new wikidocpages. Have I put them in correctly?

Are you happy with them?

I can put in more (50 operation scripts plus patient information)if you like the idea.

Michael michaeledwardsok@btinternet.com

Dear Michael,

Thank you for your additions! They look great! Please add more.

Mike

Wikipedia

I am curious why you guys didn't join wikipedia? It seems this is sort of the same concept and much of the data is just copied and passed from there with out the reference base. Have added a lot to the page on obesity over the last few month if you want to update yours.

I must say these pages are a mess. There are still half functioning tags left over from wikipedia. Some of the refs have been copied over and other have not. It is under the same copy right as wikipedia so why reinvent the wheel?

Cheers --Jmh649 19:59, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. We are building pages that are geared more towards medical professionals rather than laypeople. Cardiology, signs and symptoms pages are greatly expanded / different from Wikipedia. Our differential diagnoses are greatly expanded compared to Wikipedia. We are now inviting clinicians from around the world to help improve and modify the other clinical pages as well. We have many more pathology images, clinical exam images than Wikipedia. We also have different and expanded search tools on the right hand side and the bottom. We have an Amazon like function on the left hand side that lets viewers see what other people viewed before coming to the present page and after the current page. We are adding board review software as well. We have daily news that we email to over 14,000 people. So all in all the audience is different and the depth will in time continue to grow and diverge from that of Wikipedia. I think there is a place for both. Thanks for sharing re the obesity pages! Mike

Interesting. I guess everything on both is freely usable by either party? Sounds like this is an open version of Uptodate? There is tough competition. --Jmh649 15:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, consisten with the principles of copyleft all of the content should be freely usable by either. We would be delighted for wikipedia editors to take content, as long as there is attribution. Yes, this is meant to be an open, participatory, free version of something like "Up to Date". Making this type of information freely available and widely distributable is the right thing to do, particularly for health care systems that have fewer resources. Glad to work towards coordinating our efforts for a common good. We would be hard to compete with! There is little competition in the space of credible information that is not funded by drug companies.

Agree. There are a few pages you might want to update including Obesity and ADHD.--Jmh649 70.64.215.117 16:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Great!. Will do.

Wikipedia

Hey Mike

Will look into things. I guess one of the questions is what sort of combination should take place. I like the fact that this is more health care oriented and has more safe guards against vandalism. Wikipedia of course has all the manuals on how to edit and on what sort of grammar and referencing should be used and of course has a huge audience.--Jmh649 15:38, 7 April 2009 (UTC)