Talk:Toxoplasma gondii/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: MarmotteNZ (talk · contribs) 03:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article separation between Organism and Disease

In my opinion, as of March 2013, the information related to the organism Toxoplasma_gondii and the disease Toxoplasmosis is not too well spread between both articles. Some section of the organism page give too much details about the disease and should instead refer to the disease page --MarmotteiNoZ 03:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did a first batch of clean-up ; to be reviewed :0--MarmotteiNoZ 04:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to review

Thank you for that cleanup - yes, creating proper separation between the organism and the disease has been an issue I've been trying to figure out how to appropriately address. As you did, I think it is important to leave the (now mostly empty) sections like Epidemiology pointing to the proper subsections of the Toxoplasmosis page rather than getting rid of them entirely.

Because many people are aware of Toxoplasma gondii in the context of its ability to alter host behavior, I've changed the title of the "Symtoms of disease" section (that links to the "Physiological and Behavioral Modifications of Host" subsection of Toxoplasmosis page) to that same title ("Physiological and Behavioral Modifications of Host"). Symptoms of Toxoplasmosis traditionally do not include these subtle behavioral changes, and instead usually refer to more outward, clinical symptoms (e.g Toxoplasmic encephalitis and ocular toxoplasmosis in immunocompromised patients). However, eventually I think the title should be reverted back to "Symptoms", and I'll do that once I create an appropriate stub/blurb in the Toxoplasma gondii page that clarifies the difference between traditional, severe symptoms and the more subtle behavioral/neurological changes and points to appropriate information for each in the Toxoplasmosis page.

Vertdegrece (talk) 18:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have just pinged the reviewer's talk page, since nothing has been posted here in over a month. If there is no response soon, this nomination should probably be put back into the reviewing pool. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies , I am not familiar with the review process, I didn't notice I was sort of "holding" the review; Vertdegrece thx for your additions; From my side I don't have anythign more to add at this stage :-) --MarmotteiNoZ 23:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]