Talk:Brunner syndrome

Medical guidelines
Please see WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS for how to organize and source medical articles. This Dispatch is helpful in locating the correct kinds of sources (secondary reviews): Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches. This [http://diberri.crabdance.com/cgi-bin/templatefiller/index.cgi? template filler] is helpful in generating citations from a PubMed identified (PMID). Sandy Georgia (Talk) 14:34, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Text removed
I have shortened text that was given WP:UNDUE weight based on journal letters (not reviews), and removed a large patch of text that better belongs in some other legal article. From this version, the "critique of Brunner was all sourced to letters to the editor, and the entire Implications in Law section belongs in some other legal article, with only a brief mention here. Also, please review WP:MEDMOS on article structure.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 14:35, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I have had to remove off-topic text from here for the second time. This article is about the condition, and should follow WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS, which provides for mention of the legal/genetic issues under "Society and culture".  However, the broader legal/genetic/criminal issues do not belong in this article: if you want to write that text, please find an article on Wikipedia that deals with the genetic/criminal/legal issue, which is broader than Brunner syndrome.  The sources used here are not about Brunner as much as they are about the broader issue.  Category:Medical genetics would be a starting place for finding where to write that text, as would Category:Criminal law.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:28, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Brunner syndrome has a direct connection to genetic/criminal/legal issues and the consequences of it's application in society should be on the page. It forms the basis of arguments regarding the debate in courts. This evidence has all been collected for a university project already approved by a Professor at the University of Western Ontario.
 * We are currently in the process of including evidence that supports Brunner's findings as well as evidence against it. However, the work was deleted before we could include it. We will now work in sandbox so this does not occur again.
 * Please consider the relevance of the debate in this article, as it is not at all "off-topic". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rivaridley (talk • contribs) 18:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You can sign your comments by entering four tildes ( ~ ) after them, and indent them per WP:TALK conventions by adding colons before them. The legal issues and the implications for this condition are mentioned on this page; the entire legal/genetic/medical issue, however, is beyond the scope of this one condition and belongs in another article.  Whether a University has "approved some project" has no bearing on Wikipedia policies and guidelines.  Please find another article for discussing the broader issues; that article can be linked in this article.  Working in sandbox towards something that is likely to be deleted, or will need to be moved, is not a good use of anyone's time, and your approach sounds like WP:SYN and WP:OR.   Your time will be better spent to write the text in the correct article the first time-- that is, an article that deals with the entire issue of using genetic defects as a criminal defense, of which this one condition forms a part.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Educational project
By the way, since this page is part of an educational project, the talk page should be displaying the project tag at the top-- please add it. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 20:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Impact of recent student edits
This article has recently been edited by students as part of their course work for a university course. As part of the quality metrics for the education program, we would like to determine what level of burden is placed on Wikipedia's editors by student coursework.

If you are an editor of this article who spent time correcting edits to it made by the students, please tell us how much time you spent on cleaning up the article. Please note that we are asking you to estimate only the negative effects of the students' work. If the students added good material but you spent time formatting it or making it conform to the manual of style, or copyediting it, then the material added was still a net benefit, and the work you did improved it further. If on the other hand the students added material that had to be removed, or removed good material which you had to replace, please let us know how much time you had to spend making those corrections. This includes time you may have spent posting to the students' talk pages, or to Wikipedia noticeboards, or working with them on IRC, or any other time you spent which was required to fix problems created by the students' edits. Any work you did as a Wikipedia Ambassador for that student's class should not be counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:
 * 0 -No unproductive work to clean up
 * 1 - A few minutes of work needed
 * 2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
 * 3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
 * 4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 20:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Western Ontario supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)