User:Tom (LT)

-- 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!

Tom, {{{job title}}}

Tom

About me I've been a Wikipedian since 2013, active in the anatomy, medical, and peer review areas My work 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.

Contact You can contact me on my talk page This user is a participant in WikiProject Medicine. 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

The Quarter Million Award. For your contributions to bring Trachea (estimated annual readership: 322,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Reidgreg (talk) 13:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC) The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Articles in Wikiprojects Anatomy and Medicine naturally adopt a tone of Gray's Anatomy rather than an encyclopedia written for everybody. For your work simplifying anatomy terminology for the rest of us, I award you the Tireless Contribution Barnstar. You must feel like a salmon swimming upstream, at times. – voidxor 20:15, 7 April 2020 (UTC) The Quarter Million Award.For your contributions to bring Epiglottis (estimated annual readership: 261,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Reidgreg (talk) 18:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC) The Bio-star. For diligence above and beyond that expected of a typical article reviewer, exercised over months and with far more academic rigor than any other GA review I've worked with, in Talk:Myocardial infarction/GA1. Of course, the only reason it makes sense for me to demand so much and you to put up with it is that the improvements you've made to this article can and probably will save lives. (I wish there was a more appropriate Barnstar, but while we have them for tons of trivial topics, no one has made a Medicine Barnstar that I've found. This may be upgraded to that at will should one be developed in the future) Jclemens (talk) 15:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC) The 2016 Cure Award. In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs. Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC) The Bio-star. Awarded to LT910001 (Tom LT), who successfully promoted Lung to GA status, a level-3 vital article. Good luck on your next article!   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  23:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC) Masterpieces on anatomy. For your stellar work on anatomy articles on Wikipedia (I hope Heart soon adds a new feather to your cap!), for careful GA reviews, despite unwelcome circumstances. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:20, 7 May 2016 (UTC) The Original Barnstar. About Wernicke. I appreciate your corrections. I hope it ends with the agreement of all us. Luis cerni (talk) 21:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC) The Medicine Barnstar. Great work cleaning up a number of medical articles. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 10:29, 18 June 2013 (UTC) The Original Barnstar. Great work on merging / organizing Wikipedia's medical content. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 15:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC) Globally awsome medicine-related content work. Good to have you on board. JFW | T@lk 23:25, 31 August 2013 (UTC) The Medicine Barnstar. To LT910001, for contributions to medical articles. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:04, 12 October 2013 (UTC) The Teamwork Barnstar. Thank you for news! I love it very much Was a bee (talk) 11:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC) The Barnstar of Diligence. For your excellent work on Anatomical terms of motion, and for finalizing the ridiculous amount of merges I had flagged and just thought later about. The Medicine Barnstar. You were one of the top 10 medical contributors to Wikipedia in 2013. Many thanks for all your hard work. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 20:34, 11 March 2014 (UTC) The Original Barnstar. I haven't been on for long to edit a lot of the Anatomy pages, but I award you this Barnstar; you deserve it. -Hamer(talk) 01:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC) The Reviewer Barnstar. For your excellent example of collaboration and superb editing skills, I believe you deserve this barnstar. All the best, TylerDurden8823 (talk) 07:05, 2 June 2014 (UTC) The Medicine Barnstar. For your significant work improving Wikipedia's anatomy content. Hoping that these accolades will change your mind :-) Wikipedia only succeeds because of people like you. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:49, 17 June 2014 (UTC) The Bio-star. Awarded to LT910001 (Tom LT), who successfully promoted Lung to GA status, a level-3 vital article. Good luck on your next article!   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  23:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC) The 2016 Cure Award. In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs. Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC) The Bio-star. For diligence above and beyond that expected of a typical article reviewer, exercised over months and with far more academic rigor than any other GA review I've worked with, in Talk:Myocardial infarction/GA1. Of course, the only reason it makes sense for me to demand so much and you to put up with it is that the improvements you've made to this article can and probably will save lives. (I wish there was a more appropriate Barnstar, but while we have them for tons of trivial topics, no one has made a Medicine Barnstar that I've found. This may be upgraded to that at will should one be developed in the future) Jclemens (talk) 15:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC) The 2017 Cure Award . In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs. Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 02:47, 26 April 2018 (UTC) The Quarter Million Award. For your contributions to bring Epiglottis (estimated annual readership: 261,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Reidgreg (talk) 18:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC) The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Articles in Wikiprojects Anatomy and Medicine naturally adopt a tone of Gray's Anatomy rather than an encyclopedia written for everybody. For your work simplifying anatomy terminology for the rest of us, I award you the Tireless Contribution Barnstar. You must feel like a salmon swimming upstream, at times. – voidxor 20:15, 7 April 2020 (UTC) The Reviewer Barnstar. For your detailed review of aphthous stomatitis. Lesion (talk) 18:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC) The Reviewer's Barnstar. Thanks for your recent work to reduce the GA backlog--it's much appreciated! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC) The Nuclear Barnstar. Thanks for your reviews of George T. Reynolds and Hugh Bradner. Much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:24, 19 October 2013 (UTC) The Resilient Barnstar. For your persistence and hard work as a reviewer during the extended Good Article review of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC) The Original Barnstar. Many thanks for reviewing my GA nomination of Coat of arms of Pichilemu! Küñall (talk) 14:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC) The Premium Reviewer Barnstar For your hard work, boldness and cooperative approach when reviewing Árpád, the first (or second? :) ) grand prince of the Hungarians. Borsoka (talk) 13:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC) The Barnstar of Diligence. Thank you for a very thorough and insightful review of Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey. If you keep doing GA reviews, your style and precision definitely will a tremendous benefit to the GA project and I encourage you to consider offering your keen eye and time to featured article candidates as well. ColonelHenry (talk) 00:42, 16 November 2013 (UTC) For reviewing and assisting in upgrading Larry Itliong's article to GA status I present you this dessert. Enjoy! RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC) The Premium Reviewer Barnstar. LT910001, thank you so incredibly much for your thoughtful review of Wirgman Building and for assisting the article in passing its good article nomination! -- Caponer (talk) 02:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC) The Premium Reviewer Barnstar. LT910001, I hereby award you The Premium Reviewer Barnstar for your thoughtful and thorough review of Robert White (Virginia physician) and Wirgman Building! Thank you for all your extraordinary efforts in maintaining Wikipedia's quality and standards! -- Caponer (talk) 23:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC) The Feedback Responder Barnstar. Thank you for your feedback on the PA clan peer review. It's been a great introduction to the world of wikipedia editing T. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 10:42, 29 November 2013 (UTC) Many thanks for the helpful feedback and advice on the peer review of Norwich School (independent school). Duffit5 (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

List of reviewed articles

Up-to-date count here: User:GA_bot/Stats. indicates particularly important topics, long or complex reviews. Passed Al Khawalid Anatomy Aphthous stomatitis Árpád Birth control Blackledge River Railroad Bridge Bristol Parkway railway station Buruli ulcer Coat of arms of Pichilemu Complete blood count Dayton Project Droungarios of the Watch Economy of Scotland in the Middle Ages Edmund Ætheling Etchmiadzin Cathedral Fortress of Humaitá George T. Reynolds Government in early modern Scotland Great Plague of London HIV/AIDS in Malawi Hugh Bradner Image Lake Israel the Grammarian Joseph W. Kennedy Katharine Way Khaplu Palace Kingdom of Hungary (1000–1301) Kirkbride plan Kowloon Walled City Langit Makin Mendung Larry Itliong Leukoplakia Lufthansa Flight 615 Malaria Medicinal plants Myrtle Bachelder National symbols of the Philippines New Zealand Labour Party leadership election, 2011 Olympus scandal Pitfour estate Rabeprazole Raemer Schreiber T-tubule Stapleton Road railway station The Blind Leading the Blind Underwater camouflage Wirgman Building Women in Classical Athens Ye Qianyu Zoltán of Hungary China Female genital mutilation OPEC Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Wade's Causeway Failed 'Adud al-Dawla Albanians in Egypt Anti-Muslim violence in India Biological aspects of fluorine Bladder cancer 2020 Cancer and nausea Cayman Islands Society of Professional Accountants Colegio de la Preciosa Sangre de Pichilemu Students' Center Conduction aphasia 2020 Cowpox Epidural haematoma 2020 Epirus Gerontological nursing Hadrian Health belief model History of medicine in France Indian Space Research Organisation Ku Klux Klan titles and vocabulary Leptomeningeal collateral circulation 2019 Malaysia–Vietnam relations Natural resources of India Nicaragua Canal Occupational therapy Organ transplantation in China Plastic surgery Proactiv Pyramid of Sahure Robin Hood tax Thrivent Financial for Lutherans Women in Japan Yann Martel Kilgour–Matas report Life

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.

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