User:Tom (LT)

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗
Tom
Tom, {{{job title}}}
I've been a Wikipedian since 2013, active in the anatomy, medical, and peer review areas


I like to beaver away at our anatomy articles. I've written a number of good articles (see above) and help maintain the anatomy ecosystem of infoboxes, templates and navboxes, and have been involved in writing the manual of style entry for anatomical articles. I am passionate about making anatomical language easier for lay readers to understand - usually this is achievable using standard English-language terms without any change to meaning - see my essay here WP:ANATSIMPLIFY

I maintain Wikipedia peer review, and have formed the related peer review wikiproject. I often have some project or other going on to try and make the process easier or simpler or less technically burdensome to maintain.

I also contribute frequently to the medical space (particularly in the navbox / template domain), to peer reviews, and spend my spare Wiki-time reviewing good articles.


You can contact me on my talk page
This user is a member of
WikiProject Anatomy.
This user is a member of
WikiProject Physiology.
This user is a WikiOtter.
This user has reviewed 79 Good Article nominations on Wikipedia.
This editor has contributed to quite a few peer reviews on Wikipedia.


Barnstars
List of reviewed articles

Up-to-date count here: User:GA_bot/Stats. indicates particularly important topics, long or complex reviews.

Passed

Failed

They told me that if your reader can't understand your opening sentence, he's not going to read the rest of it, and if your reader doesn't read it, what's the point of writing?

I read Science and NEJM every week, and I couldn't figure it out the first time I read it.

This would be a good example for a writing course.

As I explained in the edit box, you can't define a word in terms of other words that your readers don't understand. If they don't know what "aneuploid" means, they're unlikely to know what "monoploid" means.

And providing a link for the unfamiliar word is no excuse. Every professional editor I know agrees that you can't do that. You have to include everything in the work itself that your reader needs for a basic understanding of your point. That's why I was glad to see that Wikipedia agreed in WP:NOTJOURNAL.

I hope I didn't drive [that user] off Wikipedia. Most people don't enjoy having their writing changed. I don't usually enjoy it myself. But an ordinary reader has to understand a Wikipedia article -- at least the introduction.

-- Nbauman 09:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Hurrah!! Emboldened by this I am off to make a change to the Epidermis article. It begins "The epidermis is a stratified squamous epithelium". Well that clears things up!

--LookingGlass (talk) 06:51, 15 May 2016 (UTC)