User talk:CyborGhost

Planned articles

Masculinizing HRT / Feminizing HRT

Baseline and Monitoring
Induction of Puberty
Hormone Regimens
Effect timelines
Risks

Acquiring HRT Prescriptions

ICATH vs SOC
Competency of MHPs
Psychosocial Assessment
Referral letter
Diagnostic guidelines
Treatment eligibility

Notes from 10/23/2017!

Random info

Cyproterone acetate might cause withdrawal effects because of Addison's shock. We should consult the drug guide, probably for the MoA stuff.

Todo

Establish a Discord room for peer-review, and a simple peer-review process.

Add a "Featured Article" system, replacing the "Portal Index."

Before implementing the featured article section we need to actually have some reviewed articles to be featured, we should start by counting all of our articles as unreviewed, and then quickly pushing them through the review process, cleaning them up to closely follow the editing guide before changing the "portal index" into the "featured articles" section.

Add clear site guidelines (on the How to Edit) section, about how to *avoid giving medical advice*, and specific site rules about medical advice that we'll fill in as we figure out the lay of the legal land more.

Take the guides from around the internet (on how to dodge gatekeepers, and which doctors are good), and roll them into a wiki page, probably within the "Healthcare world map" section.

Add "Finding a doctor" and "Affording a doctor" as a major focus of the content we're adding... that's the best first-line of harm reduction.
- Compile list of doctors who use sliding scale
- Find discounts on medication through generic alternatives

Priorities

P0: Making sure there's nothing that looks like medical advice

Basic strategy

All this advice was taken into account when writing the editing guide article, but we still need to go through every article and impliment it.

Get rid of anything that looks like a "guide," and move the content into the mechanisms. We don't want to tell people what they should be taking, we want to tell them:

* How the molecular systems work.

* What the risks are (harm reduction.)

* How the drugs they're taking can affect those molecular systems.

If someone must resort to DIY, they should be able to understand all the mechanisms at play. This harm reduction approach should be legally safer for us, and medically safer for people.

This is a good way to encourage people to check their doctor's work, which is a totally legitimate (and life-saving) endeavor.

Directly quoting medical sources is totally legit. Anything that looks like medical advice must be directly cited (as a block quote section) from a standard, peer-reviewed resource. Case studies in the literature can also be cited this way.

Make sure it's crystal clear that we're not giving them medical advice, we're just quoting an accredited source with attribution.

Mad gender science

All this advice was taken into account when writing the editing guide article, but we still need to go through every article and impliment it.

Mad gender science should be either:

* Too technical for non-experimentalists (the sane) to try ordering stuff and doing things.

* Vague enough that more details would be required to make it actionable.

Also, all mad experimental stuff should be put clearly separate from sane stuff.

P1: Establish a peer review process

Let's also dedicate one of our chatrooms (maybe the mad science room - don't want to fragment ourselves too early) to discussing reviewed articles and editing articles. We have some really awesome contributors already; we just need a little bit of standardization.

Intro

We should probably have two tags, probably:

Unreviewed - there should be a banner clearly marking and explaining these.

Reviewed - no banner here, but we can put it in a "Reviewed" category or something.

For new science articles, or major additions to science articles.

We should send it to all the contributors with @contributors in the Discord. Someone should look it over, double-check everything and then, if nobody objects, flip it to "Reviewed."

Bonus

The newest "Reviewed" article can be shown as the featured article on the main page!

Before implementing the featured article section we need to actually have some reviewed articles to be featured, we should start by counting all of our articles as unreviewed, and then quickly pushing them through the review process, cleaning them up to closely follow the editing guide before changing the "portal index" into the "featured articles" section.

Wiki spam

Hi CyborGhost! It's been a while since we last talked. I hope you're doing well.

I noticed that there is a bunch of spam on the wiki. Here's a full list of pages:

Expand to see list.

Spam pages:

Users responsible for spam:

Unfortunately, I don't have permission to delete pages. Could you please delete those pages and ban the users who created them?

Thanks, Cancer (talk) 05:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Cancer Following my leaving this message for CyborGhost below after cleaning up a barrage of spam page creations, I noticed a few outstanding old spam creations in your excellent compiled list above. Any leftover spam pages have now been deleted by myself, as a global Steward, and other Global Sysops, who support local wikis by remediating blatant spam or vandalism, upholding global policies, and fulfilling various local wiki requests when local wiki administrators and bureaucrats are not very active. In addition, the above users, and more contemporary spam only accounts, have all now been globally locked, and we've put in place a number of global anonymous user only IP blocks. Finally, because of the rate of recent spam page creations and because global functionaries are not able to practicably monitor every Miraheze-hosted wiki with few or any active local administrators, I've also protected (Main) namespace at autoconfirmed as a modest means of stopping the spam only accounts in their tracks. They'll still be able to create accounts on the wiki, but at least they won't be able to easily create any pages in main namespace. At any rate, the point of me telling you this is more of a head's up that if you ever see similar spam page creations (i.e., in other namespaces) on this wiki again in the future and, if after a few days to week after contacting local wiki administrators you receive no reply, you may file a request at stewards' noticeboard on our central coordination wiki, Meta Wiki, to delete any spam page creations and globally lock the spam only accounts, where applicable. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 04:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Barrage of spam page creations on `madgendersciencewiki`

Hi CyborGhost, I'm Doug, a Steward on Miraheze. Stewards, together with Global Sysops, educate users about and enforce our global policies, on the one hand, certainly, but they also support small wikis with few or no active local bureaucrats and administrators with problems that may arise on wikis. Recently, users DarkMatterMan4500 and HeartsDo reported to global functionaries in our #cvt channel on IRC that madgendersciencewiki had been inundated with a barrage of spam only accounts creating spam page creations advertising various spam websites, requiring constant monitoring, patrolling, and deleting by Stewards and Global Sysops alike.

As we are a small team hosting nearly 4,000 wikis across the wiki farm, we obviously do not have the scale of resources to track, monitor, and remediate all spam creations. So, as part of my responsibilities as a Steward, one possibility was to enable ProtectSite as a temporary measure to limit page creations to only users in certain permission groups. Unfortunately, following a test on a similar wiki, I was unhappy with that extension's design in that it does not permit the wiki protection level to be set to autoconfirmed and its logging facilities, as well as the fact I couldn't be certain if the temporary one month protection level I'd set had indeed been set correctly. So, as you'll note, I opted instead to modify your (Main) namespace to require autoconfirmed permissions (an implicit user group granted by default to all users once they have had an account on the wiki for at least four (4) calendar days and once they've made at least ten (10) edits). Since the spam only accounts generally create fewer than three (3) pages and often only one page, this is a measure that would have minimal effect on legitimate users on the wiki, and would be remarkably effective at preventing spam from occurring on your wiki.

As always, you are of course free to revert this change, as this was designed to be an interim protective measure in absence of locally active wiki bureaucrats and administrators.

As you are the only bureaucrat on this wiki, who was briefly active in the past week and before that in October 2020, I'm opting to notify you of the actions taken by Stewards and Global Sysops in support of your wiki. If you have any questions at all, please don't hesitate to reach out to me either here by pinging my username ([[User:Dmehus|Dmehus]]) or on my user talk page on Meta. As well, for a current up-to-date list of global functionaries supporting your wiki, please see Special:GlobalUsers. :)

Thanks,
Dmehus (talk) 17:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit Access?

Hi!

Can I (User:RyanC) please get edit access? I've been doing a bit of mad science to myself, and wanted to expand the non-binary surgery information.

I tried IRC, but the channels on both libera.chat and freenode were empty, and the discord invite link doesn't work.