User talk:Agpa222/sandbox

Hi. You are off to a good start. There is a lot of assumed knowledge on this page (i.e. bipolar disorder, etc.) so it might be helpful to be more specific in terms of symptoms and what the terms mean. Also, you need some citations. It looks like you tried to add at least one but there was an error with it. Nice work so far. Psy430uk (talk) 19:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should expand some on research for treating Bipolar disorder NOS. The articles talk page mentions that there is no information on how to treat this disorder and finding these treatments out can give others insight on how to treat Bipolar NOS. In the initial paragraph, some of the sentences can be combined and the information can be condensed some. There is information that can be deleted (i.e. Subtypes of bipolar are part of the bipolar spectrum). There is some information in the first paragraph that is very similar to original articles introduction. There is a reference in the original article that states the DSM-IV TR already identifies Bipolar NOS as diagnostic code 296.8. Markhundley41 (Markhundley41 (talk) 02:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]

In the second paragraph try to state research that explains mania and explain some symptoms that are similar between Bipolar type 1 and Bipolar type 2. In the third paragraph consider rewriting the second sentence to make the information more understandable to the reader. That was a good find with Cynthia Bader if it turns out to be a reliable source. Maybe do further research into determining the newest addition of the DSM containing more information about this disorder. You have used alot of information and might need to add some new sections to the original article considering it is so small. A new section on treatments and the similarities between bipolar type 1 and type 2 disorders could help make the information flow better. Another option would be to add a section that contains relevant research to learning more about this disorder. MarkHundley41 (Markhundley41 (talk) 02:22, 18 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]

User-KevinColón Hey, I agree with Mark on a couple things, I like what you've done so far and I think you can add a little more detail about certain aspects of bipolar and the other conditions you mentioned. For instance, I'd move the definition you provided for mania from the second paragraph to the first, or you could link mania like "mania" like you did with hypomania. Also maybe a link to schizophrenia.

There were some grammar things I noticed, the sentence starting with " If an individual is manic" sort of ends abruptly, and isntead of saying bipolar NOS occurs, I would say "reached," as in the diagnosis was reached or concluded to be, but that's just me. In the next paragraph, bipolar 1 and bipolar type II, for consistency I would either stick with numbers or Roman numerals for both.

Overall though it looks good I liked reading the page. There looked like there was a problem with your references section, an error loaded on my screen so maybe check that out if you haven't already fixed it — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinColón (talk • contribs) 17:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]