Your GA nomination of Dyslexia

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dyslexia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bluerasberry -- Bluerasberry (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Dyslexia

The article Dyslexia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dyslexia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 15:23, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Dyslexia--Moxy (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dyslexia

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:09, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dyslexia/GA2

Thanks for the thanks! Have just noticed: what does "sounding out words" in the second line of the Lead mean? ~ P-123 (talk) 12:32, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P-123 dyslexics go by different routes of learning they need "sounds" to ascertain what it is they are saying or being said...in this case it simply means an emphasis on the word..example -the train is coming,,,a dyslexic would say - t-h-e t-r-a-I-n I-s c-o-m-I-n-g to get a full appreciation of the sentence, it isn't easy , thanks for asking--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I thought that is what it meant. ~ P-123 (talk) 15:10, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "sounding out words" in the second sentence is clear enough for the general reader, but I cannot think of a better way to say it the moment. ~ P-123 (talk) 15:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P-123 don't worry, and thanks again for your valuable help ([7])--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to say clearly which option you are applying for, whether it is obvious or not. Wiki CRUK John (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC) Approved[reply]

• [8] --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC) Approved[reply]

you are correct,thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 09:11, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

—Given that the remedy has just been enacted, I am providing this notice to everybody who has participated in the discussion on Jimbo Wales' talk page for their information. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, for informing me on this controversial med subject--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ozzie.. I think that Perhaps these 3 do need a little rearranging.. Guinea with the lowest cases, but the index case has to stay first, Sierra Leone second sounds good, with Liberia last Mostly because of the total case counts. The daily Case counts must be viewed cautiously, how many times has it happened that case counts slow, just before it resurfaces in a new region. Also i'm concerned about the 'Suspected case' counts that are still increasing, as well as the slowness of reports coming out of Liberia. Then again it wont move to "Contained" until WHO confirms... So I see no real problem with a little reshuffle.. _Gremlin^SA 13:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note update.. Looking at latest released figures from Liberia.. Feb 28th http://www.mohsw.gov.lr/documents/Sitrep%20289%20Feb%2028th%202015.pdf - suspected:4354 Probable:1877 Confirmed:3149, and March 5th http://www.mohsw.gov.lr/documents/Sitrep%20294%20March%205th%202015.pdf suspected:4479 (+125) Probable:1879(+2) Confirmed:3149... thats 127 cases in 5 days. _Gremlin^SA 11:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You cite MEDDATE in a lot of discussions, so I wanted to take a moment to clarify that "rule". It's meant to be a rule of thumb, rather than an absolute requirement. It doesn't say just "five years"; it says "five years or so", and those last two words matter. It also says that the rule was written for subjects that receive the most attention, like Hypertension, and not for rare diseases or other subjects that don't see much research attention.

What you really want is to consider the last few high-quality secondary sources, which (depending on the subject) might be professional-level books or review articles. We want to take advantage of what MEDDATE calls the "full review cycle": Alice published a review, Bob published a primary study, and Chris read both Alice's and Bob's papers and wrote a new review. If it took ten years to get through a full review cycle, then MEDDATE actually wants ten years, not five. Conversely, if you get three good review articles every month, then MEDDATE would rather than you used this year's or last year's best publications, instead of going back to anything that was no more than four years and 364 days old. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

your correct, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 00:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Humans and the Environment

Hi Ozzie10aaaa. A notification came up that you asked me a question[10], but I then saw you reverted it so assumed you changed your mind. I only just now noticed that you asked it in another format. I know Jytdog gave an answer at WT:MED#Safety of genetically modified foods, but since that thread is getting quite long and relatively stale I though I would give my 2 cents here. Feel free to move it back there if you think that appropriate.

The interactions between GMOs and the environment then the environment and humans are complicated so a straight answer may be difficult. Some of the main environmental concerns covered at the controversies page are; insects developing resistance, horizontal gene transfer to other plants, death of non-target organisms, loss of biodiversity and secondary pests becoming more prominent. The effect of these on the environment are hard to accurately predict, let alone whether they will have any indirect effect on human health. Glyphosphate-resistant weeds resulting from gene flow are unlikely to develop outside of crops as they do not provide any selective advantage in the wild, but insect resistant ones might. Loss of biodiversity is a problem with all agriculture and so is the death of non-target organisms. Everything is interconnected in some way so I can't honestly say something occurring to environment through genetic engineering will never effect human health at some point. I feel that would be true for any technology though. Most people when thinking about human health and GM food are more concerned with the direct relationship. If I eat this will it be harmful to me. I think the article is better off distinguishing between the environment and human health the way it does.

You gave an example that increased pesticides used on GM crops may lead to increased risk of cancers.[11] The theory being that GMO crops have increased pesticide use and high levels of pesticide are a risk factor for some cancers. Currently there are two main groups of GM crops on the market (Bt crops and glyphosphate resistant crops). Bt crops actually use less pesticide since they are modified to be insect resistant (so need less synthetic pesticide). The Bt toxin itself has been shown through multiple studies to be harmless to humans and even non-target insects[12][13][14]. Glyphosphate is relatively safe to humans (see Glyphosate#Human toxicity) compared to other herbicides. Any chemical application is going to be regulated under various governmental acts designed to keep toxicity levels below a certain level and this will apply to all crops including GMO ones. You also have to take into account that most toxicity studies are done using straight round-up or a similar product, whereas in practice the final food product will at most have only residue of the chemical and in most cases virtually none of the pesticide will remain. Again all this is all regulated (with-holding periods and the like) and not unique to GMO.

Anyway, I am not trying to convince you to become a supporter GM. I don't even really know where you stand on the issue. I personally see huge potential and most of the risks as being speculative, especially those related to human health. I knew a group of researchers that were trying to put vaccines in bananas. One idea being that they could be used to vaccinate kids in regions with unreliable or no power. I think this factor and many other similar ones get overlooked and the discussion is dominated by Monsanto's involvement and much of the opposition is because of them. AIRcorn (talk) 05:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on GM food

Note about this RfC where you !voted. I tweaked the statement to make it more clear that it is about eating GM food and health. I'm notifying each person who !voted, in case that matters to you. Sorry for the trouble. Jytdog (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(redact)this is an important topic.[15] thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:41, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you (especially coming from you)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NP my friend!! . On a side note I noticed you edit Ebola articles...new book out Center For Disease Control; Francois Wilson (2014). CDC Guidance on Ebola Virus (EVD): 2014 Edition. International Publications Media Group. ISBN 978-1-63267-011-3. and..last month they also digitized Ebola Virus: New Insights for the Healthcare Professional: 2011 Edition: ScholarlyPaper. Scholarly Editions. 2012. ISBN 978-1-4649-1493-5. -- Moxy (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

your are the best!..thanks!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you deserve that cup of coffee! I left a note on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Disagreement_at_Psychosurgery_and_History_of_psychosurgery, thanking you as well for your note about my "valuable" opinion. If there is an emerging consensus perhaps it would be useful if you left a note under Talk:History of psychosurgery as well to prevent deletion of those useful references at least under that heading. Philipegalite (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

and thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also appreciate the way you tell people that you've commented on a discussion and encourage them to do the same. Please keep it up. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you WhatamIdoing, --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:42, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

for you!

Although we have not directly communicated with each other I have followed your diligent, fair and outstanding work towards making Wikipedia work in an otherwise unintelligible labyrinth. WikiProject Medicine is working at its best , better than formerly because of the team work you have promoted. I quit editing last year disappointed but you have tackled the same issue with more success and fairness. Stay vigilant for scholarship and justice! In the meantime have a cherry coke and a cheeseburger from me! Thank your for the vindication of my previous editing work! LeBassRobespierre (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC) |}[reply]

thank you --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:14, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ozzie, I've had your page on my watch list because we work on the Ebola article together. I noticed that you deleted Waid's note. Was it by accident? I've known Waid for years and can hardly say how many times I've gone to her for advise. IMO, she's one of our best editors and I've never seen her to display the arrogance and lack of good intent that is not uncommon for this project. If she tried to help me I'd consider it an honor that she was willing to spend the time on me, a less experienced editor. Gandydancer (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

actually it was to place inline cites on articles that need it, which I will,(some individuals simply have a different way, though she is professional), ,,BTW now that I have your attention I wanted you to know its always been a pleasure to work with you (and I spoke with Brian he added some info to the article...he's OK), --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. I know he's thinking about it. There's no need to keep it visible. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:02, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for any advise... thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"On the same day, the tree were the outbreak began, was identified.[16]" That reference is about Liberia, so should I move it out of the Guinea section? Art LaPella (talk) 16:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Art LaPella..Art its this ref [17] and its in Guinea.thanks for checking I wish everyone were like you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reedited. Art LaPella (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Art--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:50, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on Stab wound for a little bit and I am working to get it up to GA status hopefully but I really am sort of limited in what else I can add. It is a very niche subject and I have juiced all my sources dry. If you have a moment would you mind taking a look at it and giving your input? Anything is valued. Peter.C • talk • contribs 14:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

absolutely, thank you for asking (and Myasthenia gravis )--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MG

I just want to thank you for all fo the hard work you put into MG over the past week, we have made a lot of progress. What else do you think we need to tackle before trying for GA? Peter.C • talk • contribs 20:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peter.C • talk • contribs I would nominate it for GA now (it takes a while for the process ..in the meantime we could get a good CE on it)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, before I do that though I want to try to find a proper source for the physical exam, probably need to find a review article from Up-To-Date or some other source. Will also try to expand the lead a slight bit and remove the refs to conform to MEDMOS. Will try to nom by the end of day. Also - know any good CE who could do a quick run through of it? Peter.C • talk • contribs 14:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peter.C • talk • contribsWikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Requests this is the official CE,..aweaome...good luck (collaboration of the month[18], as well)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:48, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You recently edited the article on Heyde's syndrome and added a lot of 'medical reference needed' tags with no explanation or anything else. Could you please check the talk page for that article and let me know what I need to change? There are a lot of old references in the text, but I think they are valuable. Thanks for your help. Michael Dacre (talk - contribs - email) 17:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for asking--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ozzie10aaaa - just to say I've written on talk page. cheers --Iztwoz (talk) 07:35, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 09:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The page looks so good compared to this morning, great job! If you need any more help(on anything), just let me know, I am glad to help you out! XxX ellen

EllenvanderVeen (talk) 20:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you (Autosomal recessive polycystic kidney article benefited alot from your input)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've uploaded an image to commons for this article, but being new to this stuff I wasn't able to provide necessary information on the copyrights status. The image actually is all around the internet and I'm fairly sure it's free. An admin on the commons told me that my only chance is to contact the original creator and ask for permission. I traced the image to here.(NYtimes article attributes it to them) But I was unable to find the image on that site, nor could I find the creator of the image.(though I found who the eye belonged to) I'm overwhelmed by the amount of work this needed and I feel like it's a newbie mistake. Is there an easy way to do this? The image obviously not essential, but I think it would be nice to have it. Hope you have time, thanks in advance. Darwinian Ape ^talk 21:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Darwinian Ape ^talk yes, thanks for asking--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, for your help. Darwinian Ape ^talk 22:45, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ozzie i need your input here User:BrianGroen/Ebola_virus_disease_in_Nigeria .. Kind Regards Brian BrianGroen (talk) 17:30, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

absolutely, thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you very much!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking time to reach out to me regarding my article. I do have a question regarding the Clinical studies section. I happen to have the clinical study documentation on hand, but I'm not sure these have actually been published online. How do I cite this properly? Can I just include the study title, ref number date and company that conducted the study? Thanks for your help. James Schultz (talk) 15:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the article about Medical Citations and it stated that studies where animal test subjects are used do not qualify as a "Clinical Study" and should be referred to as "Pre-Clinical Studies". Each of these studies were conducted on laboratory animals. Should I list them as "Pre-Clinical" rather than "Clinical"? Thanks James Schultz (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

James Schultz (in response to both posts) ...yes you may list them consistent with Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles but first it needs to be PubMed indexed, (it needs to not be a primary study only with exceptions, are they included per Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)), any article (journal) needs to be a review or meta-analysis thus a secondary source (I should point out that it is important that you not have a conflict of interest with the article either as primary, secondary or corresponding author)....you may also use a source such as a position statement from CDC,WHO,HHS,NIH and so forth or a medical textbook, please feel free to ask should there be any questions, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ozzie10aaaa. Don't quote me on this, but I believe the initial studies referred to were primary studies conducted for a particular manufacturer. In any event, I have removed them and found some on ClinicalTrials.gov. I only used completed studies with documented results. Thanks again for your help. If you have further suggestions to improve the article, I'd really appreciate it. James Schultz (talk) 16:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

will respond on article talk page, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment on my WikiProject Medicine Announcement. Is this something you would be interested in participating in? Not sure of your location- or would the project or the Wikipedia Foundation support or sponsor someone involved to attend and present? Feel free to contact me or pass along this request to others who might be interested/available on-wiki or by email (richardjam *at* gmail *dot* com) Richardjames444 (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Richardjames444 ...while I do live in Florida, I would probably have little problem attending (Spring 2016)...in regards to Wikipedia Foundation and funding probably DocJames would be most knowledgeable, in the meantime I will in fact pass this along to a couple of editors which should be interested...thank you for this very kind gesture--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the input, and I'll update you as more details emerge.Richardjames444 (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:38, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion regarding an issue on article neutrality is currently occurring in: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. 2601:647:4601:4634:D455:1D6A:4C07:B030 (talk) 22:34, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for notification, will comment--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:51, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

have voted--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly - the same to you. Keep up the good work, and happy editing! :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 12:59, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you so very much for the very kind holiday wishes. You always so kind and courteous toward me - your positive attitude has a lot to do with my continued editing. Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) (talk) 13:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC) aka Bfpage[reply]

thank you, Merry Christmas--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ozzie

Thank you for the xmas greetings. Dont take this the wrong way, but the bright red is so bright, and fugly, that I'm going to remove it as it hurts my eyes. It was nice of you though, thanks. -Roxy the dog™ woof 17:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 00:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:14, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits to party and play. Kind regards, -- The Anome (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you (it's a very good article)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you ( as always)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:33, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for your recent edits to Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa. I see that a broken reference has appeared in the intro to the article. I had a quick try at fixing it, but just made things worse, so I reverted my change. Could you please take a look to see if you can make a better fix? -- The Anome (talk) 01:30, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

your edit seems to have fixed it[20], thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 07:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you :-)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:05, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you (Merry Xmas)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your guidance--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:29, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you John, Merry Xmas--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, Merry Xmas (its very good to work w/ you)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you were able to track it down. Sorry I wasn't any help, but I was at the office all day. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:32, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you anyway :-)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 00:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made a vote on Talk:Clyde cancer cluster. I encourage you highly to vote on whether Alexa should or shouldn't have a separate article. Thanks. Philmonte101 (talk) 03:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

will comment on article/talk, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:20, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thank you for all your constructive edits to my editing in the past. The article I created, Neonatal infection is scheduled to appear on Main page sometime in the "Did you know..." section in about a week. If you would like to help make it even better, please feel free to polish it up with me. Thanks again and Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) (talk) 13:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara (WVS) I'm honored and will take you up on that, thank you very much--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thank you Doc James, this means a lot to me,I am very grateful, --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:21, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to respond to the RFC re: Deepak Chopra under your comment, but I wanted to make sure I'm doing it right first... Am I supposed to reply directly on Talk:Deepak Chopra or is there a separate page like for AFDs? Also, is that the right place to go into detail about anything in the lead that I have an issue with or do you think it's only for discussing POV issues? Sorry this is a dumb question. I guess I never participated in in an AFC before. Permstrump (talk) 01:33, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Deepak_Chopra, yes comment at the talk page (RfC), please read the top of the talk page first for more information, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:15, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you think over your position concerning the pertinence of the image on bipolar disorder. It is present in numerous sources and strongly associated with the topic. CFCF 💌 📧 11:29, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe you make a valid point, however Images should look like what they are meant to illustrate[23], I will think it over[24]...--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Wpegden (talk) 16:36, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

have commented, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

have answered, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for the opportunity to help w/ such an important article--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 01:10, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Medullary cystic kidney disease

Hey, I'm still working on the article for Medullary cystic kidney disease. Are you done with as everything you could think of? If so, I'll post on the WikiProject Medicine talk page to ask for additional input just in case. NJ (talk) 01:17, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NJ ill finish it this week (ive been watching the article and you've made some great edits to the article!), thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 01:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

for you!

Thank you so much for your work on medullary cystic kidney disease! I will learn a lot from your contributions. You have worked tirelessly on the article, and should be proud of your work. Cheers! NJ (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thanks,NJ however I think this was a team effort, therefore thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, this is very kind of you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 09:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]