User talk:Schaffm
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Schaffm, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 04:26, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Immcarle7 (talk) 23:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)Hi Schaffm! I'm introducing myself to you on wikipedia! I'm Immcarle7. Nice to see you around these parts.
Revisions to your Lead Section
[edit]- Add wiki links to “immunoglobulin”/“antibody” in first paragraph so that those who may not understand antibodies too well can read up on it. - Last sentence of lead section’s first paragraph is a run-on. Is there a way to add the information about long diagnosis times to a second sentence?
- Second lead paragraph, first sentence: “For individuals affected by CVID, it is a disease that affects them throughout their lives. There is no known cure, and treatment options are limited to life-long immunoglobulin replacement therapy.” - Add wiki links to the different “CDs” if you’re going to introduce them in the lead section. Lets people refer to those pages for reference. - Can also add wiki link to “T cell” - I would remove the sentence about diagnosis involving “production of Ig two standard deviations away from average,” unless you could find a way to make that more clear/more introductory. The flow doesn’t quite fit with the rest of the lead section.
- Third lead paragraph, first sentence: “The first case of CVID was diagnosed over 60 years ago, and has since emerged as…”
I think this is a really well-done lead section. It gives plenty of background which can be easily understood by a general audience, but also introduces certain topics that those in-the-know would appreciate. It makes links to both genetics, as well as to medicine, which gives it a wider audience reach.
The biggest edit that I can see you making is to expand on the genetic reasons for CVID in the second paragraph. Could you explain what DNA deletions are and why that would lead to disease states? Then, you could group all of the “medical” topics together into the third paragraph. Right now, I see both the second and third paragraphs mentioning diagnoses and treatment. This would give the lead section more flow as you go from general info -> DNA/molecular explanation for CVID -> cellular explanation/effects of CVID -> ramifications of CVID in a diagnosed individual -> medical treatments.
Other than that, I think it's a very strong addition you made to the page. Also, I noticed that you only had 4 sources in the talk section of the page you're editing. Is that still the case? I think Debby would like 5 sources minimum. Immcarle5 (talk) 18:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)