User talk:KW~enwikibooks

KW aka Kirt T C

I am interested very much in the Wiki Process and shared public knowledge bases, especially in the topic area of emergency medicine (EM).

Note 206.180.152.3 was me, inadvertently not signed in... another story there- later KW

I am joining Paris Lovett in the development of OCTEM, the Wikibook textbook of emergency medicine.

In particular, I am interested in breaking down the structure of the knowledge of emergency medicine into small chunks (factoids ?) with extensive hyperlinks and multiple schemes of organization of the factoids. I am interested in the ultimate user perspective to rapidly get to the exact piece of information desired in the format/organization desired.
 * Chunks

The structure of the wikibook must match an easily used, easily understood cognitive paradigm.

For example, current physical textbooks in EM typically have chapters of 20-50 pages, with several types of organization, controlled by a table of contents (TOC). The TOC may be presented in two levels of detail- first a one page summary with just chapter title, one or two lines and page number to get there. A second level of detail may go for 8 or 10 pages and show every section within the chapters and a page number (to get there). An index is in the back of the book, where words and phrases are given in alphabetic order with page numbers and maybe short identifiers of the entry.

These are logical structures to emulate and keep current automatically. Links are better than page numbers.

I believe there should be multiple Tables of Contents - super-structures to the OCTEM, using different organisational methods to point into the articles.

For example, one could start with diseses and break them down to groups and subgroups with treatments ultimately discussed.

Or one could organize a TOC of drugs, by large classes and sub classes and then by indications (diagnoses) and ultimately point to the many of the same terminal articles, ie leaf-pages in these two different logical trees.

A third tree might break cardinal symptoms into groups, subgroups of symptoms or micro-syndromes, and proceed to diseases and treatments. This perspective, of the same knowledge ultimately, starts from the pragmatic context of how we handle a particular patient, fitting his/her symptoms into patterns of possible diagnoses, deciding upon tests to further clarify, and then decide treatments.

A paper text book typically has chapters which may be organized in one or more of the above structures, but the text can only exist in one chapter and the user is left to the index to find related sections.

Super index pages may help "disambiguate" where the user really wants to go when looking up "chest pain" by giving a brief but helpful few words to give the context and content of eack link to the phrase chest pain, when there will be many.

I believe very thoughtful design by those of us who understand both database structure and emergency medicine knowledge should lay out a structure and maintain it as many authors fill in the blanks, in a form that is ultimately clear and useful to many readers.

I expect there to be hundreds of users for each real contributor/writers and a few designers to plan for the layout of the many writers.

The ultimate design should optimize the readers' experience first and the contributors second.

Ultimately, I believe a real textbook of medicine must be stabilized and controlled somehow. I, as a physician reader, cannot look up information that may have just been edited in error by a malicious or ignorant writer. I want the textbook to be a reliable source of details. Facts such as drug doses for various indications and patient circumstances therefore must be correct and will be correct when thay are viewed and corrected by many. As an emergency physician in practice, ( a reader-role) I want to be able to quickly type "magnesium seizures pregnancy" and land right in a context I can quickly verify is what I want and find doses and strategy to use and depend upon for a particular patient. There are many times this will be more reliable than my memory for situations which do not occur frequently in practice.

I believe we can evolve and design a process for allowing wide open contributions to the textbook and still also have an editor role, electronically-supported process where a small committee is assigned responsibility for selected articles. These editorial committees would typically include EM residency faculty members. Submissions from anyone would be approved or vetoed electronically by committee members individually, as an enhanced function analogous to WatchLists in standard Wiki use. There would be many committees linked to each juried article. Other sections may be visible or just visible within Talk or discussion areas, but clearly delineated and not certified by the above process.

I believe this can be done with simple extensions to the WIki registration and history-tracking system.

A mode may distinguish the editorially-controlled portions or tabs such as history and discussion tabs which might show changes not approved by editorial subcommittee yet or even those not approved for general inclusion.

I do believe the OCTEM will need to be extracted from the WIkibook.org system, using a separate server to modify the software and control the user registration somewhat. The software is open source and the current model is compatible with changing ultimately to a controlled system, as the content as well as the wiki software are open source and may be taken and enhanced as I have suggested.

KW

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called KW. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name KW~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:06, 19 April 2015 (UTC)