158:
142:
559:(around 65% of its total budget). (Note to Knowledge (XXG) editors: The 65% is not representative of how the charity processes donations as it includes retail. For every pound the charity receives, excluding its retail chain, 80 pence is available to spend on its work. In addition to the £334 million on research, in 2009/10 the charity spent a further £14 million on cancer information and advocacy. See the Annual Report and Accounts
857:
deliver, we have included advice on neutrality and conflict of interest policies, and as a result the CRUK staff are well aware of these issues. The training has been openly documented on the
Wikimedia UK site. The involvement of Cancer Research UK staff in reviewing and improving Knowledge (XXG) articles is clearly a very positive thing for the encyclopedia. They're not merely allowed to contribute; they're welcome to.
635:
275:
213:
473:
244:
809:
something like "Arsenal sell tickets through third parties. After complaints about counterfeiting, Arsenal severed their relationship with one such reseller" - this would give the misleading impression that
Arsenal is unusual in the way it sells its tickets, that the club mismanages the process and that some at least of the resellers may be engaged in criminal activity."
1332:, you added it, without any explanation here. Please help. I'm not sure either. The article is a fairly basic explanation of CRUK, in reasonable prose, which is perhaps what makes it read like PR? So what should we do? Certainly the sources are mostly primary, so the same info regurgitated by RS media from press releases will probably be regarded as preferable.
391:
364:
401:
783:"Cancer Research UK engages for-profit third party telephone fundraising companies to make unsolicited calls to supporters and potential supporters. Cancer Research temporarily suspended the use of its fundraising agencies GoGen and Pell and Bales in 2009, but has since re-engaged telephone fundraisers."
1313:
Hi there. Henry from CRUK here - dusting off my user account after a long absence. I'm trying to investigate how we might improve the page so that it no longer has a banner saying it 'reads like a press release'. Happy to work with any passing editors to update the relevant sections, although I'm not
808:
It was a banal incident with zero consequences. By adding it to the article you indicate that it is noteworthy. Your argument about football stadia is back to front because this discussion is about how readers will interpret that addition of information to an article. The equivalent would actually be
1346:
Redundant sections, overuse of name, repeatedly saying that what it work on is cancer, general wordiness. Description of leading researchers instead of just links. "Temozolomide" a/c our article has a minor effectiveness, and some of the work listed, and almost all the scientists were supported by
755:
knock on your door, shove tins in your face in the street, telephone you or send unsolicited mail. By mentioning one minor incident, which was immediately tackled by CRUK, you give the impression that they are in some way dodgy. I'll bet that every major charity has had incidents like this, possibly
720:
Original: "Cancer
Research UK engages for-profit third party telephone fundraising companies to make unsolicited calls to supporters and potential supporters. In 2009, it was widely reported in the national press that great offence was caused to one recipient of such a call who was battling terminal
605:
You're at liberty to make these and any other changes yourself provided you don't turn the article into an advertisement! Conflict of interest is usually only taken to arise when a substantial quantity of material is added or removed by an editor who is involved with the subject, potentially leading
549:
In the 1920s, a group of doctors and scientists from the ICRF wanted to focus more heavily on clinical research rather than fundamental lab research. They formed a new charity, the
British Empire Cancer Campaign, later renamed The Cancer Research Campaign. Decades later, the two organisations would
786:
I hope this redraft removes any perceived suggestion that there is any issue with CRUK using 3rd party fundraisers, and consequently removes any perceived need for reference to
Charity Commission comment on the matter. (Perhaps incidentally, I would also disagree with the statement "if do anything
731:
Redraft: "Cancer
Research UK engages for-profit third party telephone fundraising companies to make unsolicited calls to supporters and potential supporters, which was criticised in the national press in 2009 . Cancer Research temporarily suspended the use of its fundraising agencies GoGen and Pell
724:
Upon re-reading, I would agree that the words "questionable tactics" represent POV and ought not feature in the edit. Nevertheless, I do feel that it is a fact worth mentioning that CRUK make use of third party fundraisers, and I would suggest that these third party fundraisers are the main 'face'
606:
to a non-neutral article. That doesn't seem to apply here, especially since you made it clear on the talk page. I'd suggest you use an edit summary along the lines of "factual material plus references added by CRUK staff member - see talk page". That way, if anyone objects they can easily alter it.
856:
Just for the record, Cancer
Research UK brought in a team of experienced Wikipedians (including myself) from Wikimedia UK to train them how to engage with Knowledge (XXG) and to help them make their first edits. We have stayed in occasional touch since. Just as with any Knowledge (XXG) training we
776:
I am not seeking to give the impression that CRUK are dodgy, and would disagree that this could be inferred from my redraft. I feel it is reasonable to state the fact that CRUK use third party fundraisers in the article, and the fact that other charities also use third party fundraisers is not
296:
1350:'world's Largest " is not justified by the sources: The Charities Direct ref is for 2009 and only covers the UK. The BBC's "the biggest independent cancer research organisation in the world." is from 2001. And it may not be true, because the ACS figure for 2012 is larger.
721:
cancer. Following this incident, and a Daily Mirror report on the questionable tactics employed by fund raising companies, Cancer
Research temporarily suspended the use of its fundraising agencies GoGen and Pell and Bales, but has since re-engaged telephone fundraisers."
684:
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on
941:
The CRUK 2013/14 Annual Report is now out. COI issues I think prevent me from updating the figures etc in the article, which are now 3 years out of date (I did update the revenue to last year's previously). All available
777:
sufficient to deny inclusion of the fact that CRUK do. By way of analogy, all football teams have stadia, yet this would not justify the removal of references to the
Emirates Stadium from the Arsenal article.
135:
150:
879:
The date format in the infobox is inconsistent with the rest of the article and different from the original date format used in the article. This article already used dmy format when the infobox was added
482:
374:
915:) and is inconsistent with the date format in the lead, which was there several years before the infobox was added. If no further objections are raised I intend to amend it to show as 4 February 2002.
681:
is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with
Knowledge (XXG) policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
756:
leading to complaints, but don't forget that every UK charity is regulated and if they do anything seriously wrong the regulators come down on them like a ton of bricks. My edit summary said
1172:
1162:
1018:
790:
Finally, I would like to state that I do not "have it in for CRUK". The comment does not assume good faith, which I understand is one of the principles on which Knowledge (XXG) is built.
419:
1425:
487:
171:
423:
717:
The following edit was criticised as "Extreme POV" (with which I would respectfully disagree), and I would like to suggest a redraft taking into account the criticisms made.
1430:
1222:
1218:
1204:
1068:
1064:
1050:
346:
1314:
sure exactly what needs to change. Am acutely aware of WP:COI policy so don't want to make edits directly. Do message me or otherwise get in touch to discuss. Thanks.
557:
1390:
1420:
1400:
336:
79:
463:
1405:
312:
184:
1173:
https://web.archive.org/20120504194150/http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075376.pdf
1163:
https://web.archive.org/20120428031840/http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075236.pdf
1019:
https://web.archive.org/20110725134828/http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_043577.pdf
44:
662:, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with
659:
1415:
453:
1176:
1166:
1022:
686:
678:
674:
651:
1298:
961:
85:
1435:
760:
Now if you can find any comments from the Charities Commission that CRUK engages in shady and underhand tactics that's a whole different story...
560:
555:
964:
626:
I removed the advert written here on the Talk Page. The talk pages are here for a reason to talk and discuss the article not some scam medicine.
1395:
690:
428:
303:
280:
824:
30:
780:
Nevertheless, in order to further minimise the possibility of the section being read in this way, I would propose the following redraft:
1278:
593:
224:
1410:
819:
Cancer Research UK is turning its specialists loose on the internet to get them to tidy up the online encyclopedia - Knowledge (XXG).
563:
99:
414:
369:
104:
20:
74:
1028:
255:
65:
1182:
670:
642:
943:
191:
1362:
I know many or probably ,ost other organization articles are no better. I intend to get to them. Maybe ACS next.
1177:
http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075376.pdf
1167:
http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_075236.pdf
1023:
http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@abt/@gen/documents/generalcontent/cr_043577.pdf
109:
728:
Are any views held regarding the following redraft, intended to address the criticisms levelled at the original?
540:
Add Scottish charity number: (registered charity number in England and Wales: 1089464 and in Scotland: SC041666)
1221:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1067:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
971:
950:
700:
126:
828:
261:
589:
1282:
862:
798:
737:
581:
554:
Under ‘Research’: In the financial year 2009/10 the charity spent £334 million on cancer research projects
198:
912:
55:
1260:
1240:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1228:
1106:
1086:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1074:
585:
311:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
647:
229:
70:
843:
765:
611:
522:
887:
646:
is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under
243:
1319:
967:
946:
696:
177:
1128:
990:
858:
794:
733:
509:
I've removed the section discussing the proportion of the charity's income spent on research per
24:
1225:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1071:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
510:
1241:
1087:
1337:
1138:
1000:
923:
898:
832:
51:
1256:
1102:
1248:
1094:
1029:
https://web.archive.org/20100624083615/http://www.ukcmri.ac.uk:80/press/press_release5.html
537:
Cancer Research UK would like to suggest the following edits to its Knowledge (XXG) entry:
1146:
1008:
886:
so the inconsistent date format in the infobox should have been corrected at the time per
839:
761:
607:
514:
406:
663:
1315:
1207:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1053:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
165:
1247:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1214:
1156:
1093:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1060:
634:
1384:
1369:
308:
1032:
911:
The date in the infobox currently reads as February 4, 2002 which is US format (see
571:
Around 40% of the charity’s research expenditure goes on basic laboratory research…
1333:
1183:
https://web.archive.org/20141111111234/http://web-archive-sources.org/cr_075236.pdf
916:
891:
543:
Insert the following paragraph beneath Imperial Cancer Research Fund paragraph:
295:
274:
1186:
212:
1213:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1059:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
396:
821:
1373:
1341:
1323:
1286:
1268:
1114:
975:
954:
930:
905:
866:
847:
802:
769:
747:
I don't know why you have it in for CRUK. Name me a major charity that does
741:
704:
615:
597:
527:
219:
1364:
1329:
787:
seriously wrong the regulators come down on them like a ton of bricks").
125:
1143:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
1005:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
472:
758:"There are no reliable sources showing that this is significant issue".
732:
and Bales in 2009, but has since re-engaged telephone fundraisers."
390:
363:
1151:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
1013:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
658:
Knowledge (XXG) article constitutes fair use. In addition to the
426:. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at
141:
1305:
Is a donation to Cancer Research UK tax deductible in the US?
883:(4 February 2002 used in the lead), as it has done since 2006
237:
207:
15:
418:, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the
1192:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1038:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
633:
471:
218:
A fact from this article was featured on Knowledge (XXG)'s
149:
630:
Fair use rationale for Image:Logo cancer research uk.png
1132:
1127:
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
994:
989:
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
884:
881:
307:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1297:tags on this page without content in them (see the
1217:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1157:
http://www.charitiesdirect.com/charities/top500.php
1063:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
689:. If you have any questions please ask them at the
197:
1033:http://www.ukcmri.ac.uk/press/press_release5.html
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
725:of the charity for many members of the public.
574:Under ‘Fundraising’: 44,500 regular volunteers
422:and that biomedical information in any article
1203:This message was posted before February 2018.
1049:This message was posted before February 2018.
793:I would be grateful for views on the redraft.
814:BBC - Cancer charity 'tidies' Knowledge (XXG)
420:Manual of Style for medicine-related articles
157:
8:
1426:Mid-importance society and medicine articles
1187:http://web-archive-sources.org/cr_075236.pdf
679:Knowledge (XXG):Fair use rationale guideline
550:merge, forming Cancer Research UK in 2002.
568:The charity funds the work of over 4,000…
358:
269:
822:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12887075
429:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Medicine
321:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Organizations
1431:Society and medicine task force articles
360:
271:
241:
1391:Selected anniversaries (February 2013)
1421:C-Class society and medicine articles
183:
7:
1401:Mid-importance organization articles
438:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Medicine
412:This article is within the scope of
301:This article is within the scope of
1289:
751:use third party fund raisers. They
483:the Society and Medicine task force
260:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1406:WikiProject Organizations articles
960:And charity sector press stories:
324:Template:WikiProject Organizations
14:
1131:. Please take a moment to review
993:. Please take a moment to review
643:Image:Logo cancer research uk.png
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
1416:Low-importance medicine articles
677:. Using one of the templates at
424:use high-quality medical sources
399:
389:
362:
294:
273:
242:
211:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
813:
714:I would be grateful for views:
562:or p22-23 of the Annual Review
458:This article has been rated as
341:This article has been rated as
1436:All WikiProject Medicine pages
1155:Attempted to fix sourcing for
691:Media copyright questions page
1:
1396:C-Class organization articles
1309:"Reads like a press release"?
937:2013/14 Annual Report now out
838:Anyone can "tidy" wikipedia.
803:12:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
770:13:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
742:11:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
660:boilerplate fair use template
616:18:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
598:18:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
546:The Cancer Research Campaign
480:This article is supported by
441:Template:WikiProject Medicine
315:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1269:19:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
687:criteria for speedy deletion
528:17:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
1115:08:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
867:14:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
533:Request for changes by CRUK
1452:
1359:I fixed only some of this.
1234:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1149:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
1124:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1080:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1011:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
986:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
976:10:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
671:the image description page
464:project's importance scale
347:project's importance scale
1411:C-Class medicine articles
1374:19:14, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
1342:17:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
1324:14:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
1287:20:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
955:11:36, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
848:14:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
833:14:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
705:13:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
673:and edit it to include a
479:
457:
384:
340:
304:WikiProject Organizations
289:
268:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
931:08:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
906:07:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
652:explanation or rationale
1120:External links modified
982:External links modified
638:
476:
250:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
654:as to why its use in
637:
475:
327:organization articles
254:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
123:Find medical sources:
100:Neutral point of view
1215:regular verification
1200:to let others know.
1135:. If necessary, add
1061:regular verification
1046:to let others know.
997:. If necessary, add
415:WikiProject Medicine
105:No original research
1347:other agencies also
1205:After February 2018
1196:parameter below to
1051:After February 2018
1042:parameter below to
875:Infobox date format
710:Fundraising Section
1210:InternetArchiveBot
1129:Cancer Research UK
1056:InternetArchiveBot
991:Cancer Research UK
675:fair use rationale
639:
477:
256:content assessment
129:
86:dispute resolution
47:
25:Cancer Research UK
1267:
1235:
1113:
1081:
929:
904:
601:
584:comment added by
502:
501:
498:
497:
494:
493:
444:medicine articles
357:
356:
353:
352:
236:
235:
206:
205:
128:Source guidelines
127:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1443:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1296:
1263:
1262:Talk to my owner
1258:
1233:
1232:
1211:
1150:
1142:
1109:
1108:Talk to my owner
1104:
1079:
1078:
1057:
1012:
1004:
926:
921:
919:
901:
896:
894:
650:but there is no
600:
578:
525:
521:
517:
446:
445:
442:
439:
436:
409:
404:
403:
402:
393:
386:
385:
380:
377:
366:
359:
329:
328:
325:
322:
319:
298:
291:
290:
285:
277:
270:
253:
247:
246:
238:
230:February 4, 2013
215:
208:
202:
201:
187:
161:
153:
145:
131:
95:Article policies
16:
1451:
1450:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1381:
1380:
1311:
1294:
1292:
1290:
1276:
1266:
1261:
1226:
1219:have permission
1209:
1144:
1136:
1122:
1112:
1107:
1072:
1065:have permission
1055:
1006:
998:
984:
939:
924:
917:
899:
892:
877:
816:
712:
632:
624:
579:
535:
523:
519:
515:
507:
443:
440:
437:
434:
433:
407:Medicine portal
405:
400:
398:
378:
372:
326:
323:
320:
317:
316:
283:
251:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1449:
1447:
1439:
1438:
1433:
1428:
1423:
1418:
1413:
1408:
1403:
1398:
1393:
1383:
1382:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1360:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1348:
1310:
1307:
1275:
1274:tax decuctible
1272:
1259:
1253:
1252:
1245:
1190:
1189:
1181:Added archive
1179:
1171:Added archive
1169:
1161:Added archive
1159:
1121:
1118:
1105:
1099:
1098:
1091:
1036:
1035:
1027:Added archive
1025:
1017:Added archive
983:
980:
979:
978:
968:Wiki CRUK John
947:Wiki CRUK John
938:
935:
934:
933:
876:
873:
872:
871:
870:
869:
851:
850:
825:213.246.85.152
815:
812:
811:
810:
775:
773:
772:
711:
708:
697:BetacommandBot
631:
628:
623:
620:
619:
618:
553:
534:
531:
506:
503:
500:
499:
496:
495:
492:
491:
488:Mid-importance
478:
468:
467:
460:Low-importance
456:
450:
449:
447:
411:
410:
394:
382:
381:
379:Low‑importance
367:
355:
354:
351:
350:
343:Mid-importance
339:
333:
332:
330:
313:the discussion
299:
287:
286:
284:Mid‑importance
278:
266:
265:
259:
248:
234:
233:
216:
204:
203:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1448:
1437:
1434:
1432:
1429:
1427:
1424:
1422:
1419:
1417:
1414:
1412:
1409:
1407:
1404:
1402:
1399:
1397:
1394:
1392:
1389:
1388:
1386:
1375:
1371:
1367:
1366:
1361:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1349:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1339:
1335:
1331:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1308:
1306:
1300:
1288:
1284:
1280:
1279:198.134.51.41
1273:
1271:
1270:
1264:
1257:
1250:
1246:
1243:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1230:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1206:
1201:
1199:
1195:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1158:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1148:
1140:
1134:
1130:
1125:
1119:
1117:
1116:
1110:
1103:
1096:
1092:
1089:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1076:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1052:
1047:
1045:
1041:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1015:
1014:
1010:
1002:
996:
992:
987:
981:
977:
973:
969:
965:
962:
959:
958:
957:
956:
952:
948:
945:
936:
932:
927:
920:
914:
910:
909:
908:
907:
902:
895:
889:
885:
882:
874:
868:
864:
860:
859:MartinPoulter
855:
854:
853:
852:
849:
845:
841:
837:
836:
835:
834:
830:
826:
823:
820:
807:
806:
805:
804:
800:
796:
795:Wikip-ian-dia
791:
788:
784:
781:
778:
771:
767:
763:
759:
754:
750:
746:
745:
744:
743:
739:
735:
734:Wikip-ian-dia
729:
726:
722:
718:
715:
709:
707:
706:
702:
698:
694:
693:. Thank you.
692:
688:
682:
680:
676:
672:
669:Please go to
667:
665:
661:
657:
653:
649:
645:
644:
636:
629:
627:
621:
617:
613:
609:
604:
603:
602:
599:
595:
591:
587:
586:Sarastark1986
583:
575:
572:
569:
566:
564:
561:
558:
556:
551:
547:
544:
541:
538:
532:
530:
529:
526:
518:
512:
504:
489:
486:(assessed as
485:
484:
474:
470:
469:
465:
461:
455:
452:
451:
448:
431:
430:
425:
421:
417:
416:
408:
397:
395:
392:
388:
387:
383:
376:
371:
368:
365:
361:
348:
344:
338:
335:
334:
331:
318:Organizations
314:
310:
309:Organizations
306:
305:
300:
297:
293:
292:
288:
282:
281:Organizations
279:
276:
272:
267:
263:
257:
249:
245:
240:
239:
231:
227:
226:
221:
217:
214:
210:
209:
200:
196:
193:
190:
186:
182:
179:
176:
173:
172:ScienceDirect
170:
167:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
140:
137:
134:
130:
124:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1363:
1312:
1295:<ref: -->
1291:Cite error:
1277:
1254:
1229:source check
1208:
1202:
1197:
1193:
1191:
1126:
1123:
1100:
1075:source check
1054:
1048:
1043:
1039:
1037:
988:
985:
940:
913:WP:STRONGNAT
878:
818:
817:
792:
789:
785:
782:
779:
774:
757:
752:
748:
730:
727:
723:
719:
716:
713:
695:
683:
668:
655:
641:
640:
625:
577:Thank you.
576:
573:
570:
567:
552:
548:
545:
542:
539:
536:
508:
481:
459:
427:
413:
342:
302:
262:WikiProjects
223:
194:
188:
180:
174:
168:
162:
154:
146:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
580:—Preceding
228:section on
225:On this day
31:not a forum
1385:Categories
1293:There are
888:WP:DATERET
1316:HenryScow
1299:help page
1249:this tool
1242:this tool
1095:this tool
1088:this tool
622:Removed 2
505:Removed 1
220:Main Page
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1330:User:DGG
1255:Cheers.—
1139:cbignore
1101:Cheers.—
1001:cbignore
664:fair use
648:fair use
594:contribs
582:unsigned
516:Rockpock
511:WP:FORUM
435:Medicine
370:Medicine
178:Springer
143:Cochrane
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1334:Johnbod
1265::Online
1194:checked
1133:my edit
1111::Online
1040:checked
995:my edit
918:January
893:January
462:on the
375:Society
345:on the
252:C-class
222:in the
1147:nobots
1009:nobots
258:scale.
166:OpenMD
136:PubMed
1370:talk
192:Wiley
84:Seek
1338:talk
1320:talk
1283:talk
1198:true
1044:true
972:talk
963:and
951:talk
944:here
925:talk
900:talk
863:talk
844:talk
840:andy
829:talk
799:talk
766:talk
762:andy
738:talk
701:talk
656:this
612:talk
608:andy
590:talk
565:. )
185:Trip
159:Gale
151:DOAJ
73:and
1365:DGG
1223:RfC
1185:to
1175:to
1165:to
1069:RfC
1031:to
1021:to
753:all
749:not
454:Low
337:Mid
199:TWL
1387::
1372:)
1340:)
1322:)
1301:).
1285:)
1236:.
1231:}}
1227:{{
1145:{{
1141:}}
1137:{{
1082:.
1077:}}
1073:{{
1007:{{
1003:}}
999:{{
974:)
966:.
953:)
890:.
865:)
846:)
831:)
801:)
768:)
740:)
703:)
666:.
614:)
596:)
592:•
513:.
490:).
373::
54:;
1368:(
1336:(
1318:(
1281:(
1251:.
1244:.
1097:.
1090:.
970:(
949:(
928:)
922:(
903:)
897:(
861:(
842:(
827:(
797:(
764:(
736:(
699:(
610:(
588:(
524:t
520:e
466:.
432:.
349:.
264::
232:.
195:·
189:·
181:·
175:·
169:·
163:·
155:·
147:·
139:·
133:·
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
