Talk:DRAKON
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the DRAKON article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
Not a copyvio
edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAKON
The text in question was written by me. The sage.com.ua page was created after that and used the description from Wikipedia.
There are many indicators in the text proving that it was originally written for wikipedia and by me. For example:
- intelligence augmenntation is mentioned, it's my favourite topic - detailed translations of the acronym are something usually done for wikipedia pages
I can give more details if necessary. Paranoid (talk) 05:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I've looked at both pages and concur that wikipedia is the original, and the Sage site has copied a version from wikipedia somewhere around 13 June 2008. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Recommendation of Dirk Beetstra
editDirk Beetstra adviced me to discuss the question about predatory journal Junifer Pulishers. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XLinkBot#The_bot_is_wrong
See below section "DRAKON Language in Medicine"
DRAKON Language in Medicine
edit- juniperpublishers.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
The aims of algorithms in medicine are to do the right clinical decisions while standardizing and equalizing performance of practitioners. Besides, it improves the quality of health care and minimizes the risk of errors. DRAKON algorithms are ergonomical ones and help to prevent mistakes and ambiguities. DRAKON algorithmic language uniforms medical algorithms and allows complete clinical tasks successfully..
The importance of clinical algorithms in the patient diagnosis, treatment, and intervention is obvious. Similarly, algorithms are useful in education of medical practitioners, especially while working as a team. In order to maximize the utility of algorithms, they need to be simple, inclusive, and ergonomic, so that every user executes a specific algorithm in the identical manner. Medical care requires an instant implementation of latest scientific achievements. DRAKON algorithm can be used for practical “skills and drills” of undergraduate and postgraduate students. The “DRAKON” charts standardize, ensure quality of diagnostic and treatment procedures. It minimizes the possibility of error, thus, increases patient safety.[1]
References
- ^ Nadisauskiene R., Pukenyte E., Bardauskiene L., Vileikyte A., Dobozinskas P., Kumpaitiene B., Vaitkaitis D., and Krikscionaitiene A. “Drakon” Algorithmic Language in Medical Care // Journal of Gynecology and Women’s Health. Volume 4. Issue 3. — April 2017. — 555636. DOI: 10.19080/JGWH.2017.04.555636.
91.218.41.193 (talk) 06:17, 11 July 2017 (UTC) 91.218.41.193 (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- juniperpublishers.com is a journal that is on beall's list (a list of predatory journals). Articles (all? most?) in such journals tend to be 'paid for' (basically, you pay them, they will publish it, regardless of quality). Such journals are not typically peer reviewed, and one could argue that 'regular' journals may already have refused the publication. The question here is hence basically whether this particular case is a good example. @JzG: how originally identified the items on Beall's list as problematic. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:47, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, Dirk Beetstra for your help. I try to imagine the whole picture of my supposed editing. It is not finished yet. Maybe, it demand some time. Thank you once more. — 91.218.41.193 (talk) 07:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Article Size and Significance
editFor a language being just a localized Pascal clone, the article has rather large size (especially its Russian version, which is same size as articles on Java and C#). I also fail to see how the language produced any impact, outside of hurray patriotic hype in Russia. Even Russian schools continue to use Turbo Pascal (pirate copies of it). AFAIK, IT professionals in Russia consider it a joke language. NikitaSadkov (talk) 19:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- As a digital encyclopedia, I don't think there's much need to scale down Wikipedia articles based on the significance of their contents. If someone is willing and able to write a detailed article about a relatively obscure programming language, I see no reason to stop them.
- This differs to articles about people where minute details of their life can be over-represented in articles. The details of this language are just as important in the context of the language as, say, C#. Distance1969 (talk) 08:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)