Talk:X-linked ichthyosis

Medicine: Dermatology / Genetics Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Dermatology task force.
	This article is supported by the Medical genetics task force.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about X-linked ichthyosis.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Tone

This is a major expansion and deserves credit. However, it's also a personal experience essay, and needs to be re-written to sound like it belongs in an encyclopedia instead of in a blog. I've updated the WPMED assessment, but a re-write into a more formal style (that, for example, doesn't say things like "as far as I know" or refer to the experience of any individual editor) could earn it another upgrade. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have done a quick first pass, needs references to back up the opinions, but have left them in but less personal now.. Leevanjackson (talk) 00:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did a major overhaul, staying basically within the organizational scheme of the original. References are updated. The only section I don't have the expertise to comment on is the "Treatment" section, which still sounds a little informal. Medical geneticist (talk) 17:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a big improvement. Thanks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and upgraded to B-class. I don't know if it's the usual protocol for an editor involved in the article to do this, but I don't see a whole lot more that can be done with the article (modesty prevented me from upgrading to A-class). Anyone wanted to review it for GA would be welcome. Medical geneticist (talk) 19:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So long as you think your change meets the criteria listed at the assessment page, then you are perfectly welcome to update the assessment on a page that you've edited -- up to B class. Anything higher than that requires a different process. At this time, WPMED does not have a process for A-class assessments. You could nominate it for Good Article status. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article categorization

This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 00:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]