User talk:Changy19/sandbox

Keonho's Peer review

Hello I learned lot about Candida parapsilosis from your article and I would like to leave some comment that may help. Before i start, I suggest you to write the information of your fungi in sentence and paragraph instead of point form because it will help readers to comprehend the article better. In history and taxonomy section, you mentioned Candida parapsilosis is the second most pathogen in superficial Candidasis just after C.albicans. As we learned from the class, we know that C.albicans vegetatively grow as a diploid which is uncommon compared to other fungi therefore you may do extra research on growth form of Candida parapsilosis and find what makes Candida parapsilosis pathogenic similar to C.albicans. You may ask questions such as: Do Candida parapsilosis grow as diploid fungi? and if not then what makes them pathogen? Is this due to secondary metabolites and etc? Here is the journal i found from pubmed (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2570155/) and this is about what factors Candida parapsilosis can produce to be pathogenic and potential therapeutic approaches. In growth and morphology section, you can use reliable references from the fungi books in Robarts and Gerstein library which was mentioned in timeline of our wiki course page. These books may describe the physical features of Candida parapsilosis very specifically for your article and make sure to use information from recent version of book since information of Candida parapsilosis might be revised . In risk factor, disease, and virulence factor section, you did really good job with proper references however there were few words such as prosthetic valves, broad-spectrum antibiotics were not familiar to me. In the wikipedia sandbox, there is a double ring icon (Link Ctrl+K) and when you highlight the word and click that icon, you are basically linking the word to other wikipedia page that describes the word. This can help readers to understand better about specific terms such as procedure or disease they used in the article. This will help readers to understand better while they are reading the article. In physiology section, you may delete the headings and insert the information into disease and virulence factor because information you stated in physiology section overlaps with disease and virulence headings. In habitat and ecology section, you mentioned 'C.parapsilosis is not restricted to human, it has been isolated from nonhuman sources'. You can be more specific on what nonhuman sources C.parapsilosis isolated on. Here is the journal i found online about Candida parapsilosis habitat (https://academic.oup.com/femsle/article/244/2/229/470145). In treatment section, you can also explain why Candida parapsilosis is used for anti-fungal medications and give us examples for specific procedures. Good luck on your article! KeonHoKim (talk) 23:19, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Persia's Peer Review

Hi! I think the information you have already is great! I just have some tips on the organization, and maybe some extra things you can add. It may be useful to move the 'treatments' section in with the diseases section. Since you don't have a lot of information regarding the treatments, it will be helpful to the flow and overall appearance of the article if you consolidate these into one section. Also, as to the diseases, you may want to add osteomyelitis and candidemia to the list. There are a couple articles that describe the fungus in these contexts. Here are the links to some articles, one for osteomyelitis and one for candidemia: <http://casereports.bmj.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/content/2014/bcr-2014-206520>, <https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/26/5/1086/320884>. It may also be helpful to add some information about the spread of the pathogen within human populations. Here is an article to help with that: <https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/14/3/756/282120>. Also, it may be helpful to add an additional section regarding the habitat and ecology of your fungus. Things like preferred climate, growth conditions, and epidemiology (like the places/countries where these infections are most common) may add a lot to the article. Here is an example: <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/10408410903213393>. Here is another article that I think will help add some information to your virulence section: <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S108718450700028X>. Finally, I think it may be helpful to reorganize your article. Beyond combining diseases and treatments into one section, you may want to order it: History, Growth, Habitat, Virulence, Physiology, Diseases, Risk Factors. Then, if you wanted to add information to the treatment section instead of combining it, you could put that at the end. I think that makes for a more logical flow. Good luck! Persiamariah (talk) 21:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

U.Chartarum/zeeshan

23:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)~~Hi, i read about your article , i found it very interesting and informative.The material written about it doesn't seem to be adequate enough.As this type of fungus is medical issue related specifically immune compromised patient ,there should be adequate amount of information availability on pub med.You can add sub heading to describe its structural and morphological details,habitat, risk factors or medical significance along with the drug component.References mentioned are too less to know more about this fungus,otherwise information given about it is quite catchy. Thank you and Good luck23:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeeshanfaiz (talk • contribs)