User talk:Ostelter/sandbox
Review 1
[edit]Your Abstract and Format are beautiful and I really like the pathology breakdown at the bottom
Things to work on
-Epidemiology
-Title Header
- Including sub headers inside each section to increase information seeking efficiency DaBearsBillSwerski (talk) 19:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback Ethan! I did try to incorporate subheadhers inside sections that I felt were appropriate Ostelter (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Dr. Weiner
[edit]- Your abstract should not have a heading. The lack of heading is what makes it pop up above the table of contents box.
- Whenever you do need to use a medical term, reference any specific condition, body part, or treatment, link to the wikipedia article for it the first time you use it! In general, more links are better.
- When you put a subheading within a section, use wikipedia's subheadings. Subheadings are great, but don't just underline them, use the system for them.
- For the signs and symptoms: if you are actually explaining how it relates, that's great. If you're just defining it, just leave the name, and link it to the appropriate article. There were some of both here.
- "controversial causes" doesn't quite make sense here. Look for a different phrasing.
- There are a number of places where you use jargon without linking or defining it. Don't use jargon if you don't have to: lay terminology is better when you can. When you need the jargon, always link it, and it it's particularly relevant, you may want to define it as well.
- Good explanation of the mechanism! You got a lot of important pieces in here.
- Epidemiology needs information on prevalence, including whether there are any groups for which this is more common.
- There is recent primary research on this and it should be addressed in your research section. If you're having trouble finding it, come talk to me!
- You did a good job of citing your sources throughout.
Sweiner02 (talk) 18:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Amany You did a wonderful job explaining Treatment/Management. Epidemiology, cause and research need more information. Complications should be in bold as well.Aliaa01 (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
Review by Kennedi
- I absolutely loved reading your article. You picked a topic that I also find extremely interesting, and you did a good job of linking other pages to define some of the new medical terms that you used throughout the article. Honestly, your paper is great.
- I would delete the abstract heading and just begin introducing the condition with the information in the abstract to start the article.
- I see that you are still looking for more information for your epidemiology section. I think the 1-2% statistic mentioned in your abstract could even be mentioned again in this section as you continue to work on it.
- You do a pretty good job citing your sources throughout, but there’s a few spots with a couple sentences of no citation. Adding a few extra citations here and there may further protect against any suspicions of plagiarism.