School talk:Medicine

Potential peer reviewers for medical articles
For the purpose of arranging for Peer review, I've found many potential reviewers at e.g. the AMWA freelance Directory and Enago for medical articles. However, it is often quite burdensome and/or costly for me personally to arrange for peer reviews in this way (e.g. $250 to $300 for a peer review by Enago), and I'd prefer that the whole idea didn't completely depend on my own existence. Thus, it would be best if we had a list of volunteers that have the expertise for and would be willing to perform peer reviews of works in particular areas of medicine. If we can create such a list, we can then place it on the main page of this school, so that authors of original medical research articles can directly find an appropriate peer reviewer. I now start the list below (now located at Talk:Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/Peer reviewers 14:58, 20 June 2015 (UTC)). Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 10:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Mikael Häggström - I'm willing to take requests for peer review of works in the field of reproductive medicine.
 * User:Lesion-- Oral medicine
 * I have no medical expertise whatsoever but I would volunteer to support in other ways, such as by providing or arranging Wikimedia training for non-Wikimedia people who participate in this. Please message me on English Wikipedia if I am needed.  Blue Rasberry    (talk)   15:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not a physician, nurse, or medical technician. I am a scientist with many publications in the physical sciences under my real name. I have refereed or reviewed manuscripts for journals like Applied Physics Letters and the Journal of Applied Physics among about half a dozen others like the Journal of Electronic Materials. I'm willing to help where I can and would like to see the Wikiversity Journal developed. I also contribute occasionally to WikiDoc (basic science). --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:27, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you find the Wikiversity Journal project interesting I've recently prepared a page specifically for peer reviewers of this journal: Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/Peer reviewers. I think this list should be made at that page instead, so you are welcome to sign up there: Talk:Wikiversity_Journal_of_Medicine/Peer_reviewers. There are currently two works in need of peer review, and I think your input is very valuable. Also, feel free to participate in any activity under Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/Contribute. Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 15:28, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Links to Oral and maxillofacial surgery, Oral Medicine and Oral Pathology
I added links to these topics since they interface with both medicine and dentistry. Lesion (discuss • contribs) 16:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Opinion
I think everyone sees eyes to eyes on free open learning concept and Wikipedia should be appreciated for its contribution in open learning but interest in learning and learning are different thing. Medicine is very sensitive profession where there is no chance for second take. If a health profession makes mistakes then someone has to lose his life or suffer.

Wikipedia is making easier for people to access information. But frankly saying i don't find it relevant to provide medical information to everybody.Wikipedia has not yet providing clinical knowledge but i guess it is preparing to provide it soon. If it Medical science is a subject of learning for everybody then why are there so tough entrance exam, is it just to minimise no of doctor just to fit requirement or to disqualify who can make logical analysis? What if everyone tries to gain medical education to treat them self and to give advice with drug to other? Will people with Wikiversity degree (I know Wikipedia do not give any degree) will try to practice at least for them self correctly? who will be responsible if they tried to do so and found to have done greatest mistake of their life?

"Little knowledge is dangerous." Medical knowledge is comparable to the knowledge to make bomb. As like it is dangerous. so Wikiversity school of medicine would be a great source of knowledge to medical students and for benefit of humanity if it could be limited to medical students only. Giving access to medical professional and student would overcome this soon to come problem.

--Dipendra Bhusal (discuss • contribs) 17:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Medical textbooks in libraries have been accessible for everyone since ancient times without much controversy, so I think Wikiversity can be the same. Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 04:25, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikiversity is not a degree-granting institute. However Wikiversity can help medical students get a degree at a Medical School by providing a place where medical students and medical professions can participate, interact, and share their medical knowledge. Medical Schools can also rate and make accessible medical resources at Wikiversity that meet their standards of quality for inclusion as curriculum in a medical course. Wikiversity has no means to authenticate whether anyone is in fact a medical student or professional, and welcomes anyone with an interest in medicine to participate.
 * Wikiversity participants in the past have suggested that a medical disclaimer should be required for all medical-related topics and discussions, and have suggested to differentiate what to accept at Wikiversity by whether what is presented is medical advice or medical training. -- dark lama  14:33, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Why separate template
I don't see the reason why a major part of the content of this page located in the separate Template:School homepage, when, as far as I see, this is the only place where that template is used, so I just merged them. Mikael Häggström (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)