Talk:Radial glial cell

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 October 2018 and 14 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CJAmbrose, Nicole Wolard.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

glial properties
"the content of glycogen granules or the expression of the astrocyte-specific glutamate transporter or the glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). " These are glial properties? If so, should we find some references and then put it into the glial cell article? Keith Galveston (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The astrocytic hypothesis of aging of mammals
I have doubts whether this new material belongs in the article, mainly because I find it very difficult to tell whether the sources are reputable, or whether this is a fringe theory. Looie496 (talk) 04:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I can find only one citation of the dissertation, here but can't access it. The dissertation itself seems to have been translated into English here. If that is the only English language scholarly notice taken of the theory, mention in this article is premature and fails our reliable sources and weight policies and guidelines. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 06:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Ladies and Gentlemen, you has got it all vrong!!!

In article: - Radial glia only mention of The astrocytic hypothesis of aging of mammals.

Main article in en.wikipedia: - The astrocytic hypothesis of aging of mammals. It has all the reliable sources (peer-reviewed primary, secondary, and tertiary sources).

The dissertation itself seems to have been translated into English here. This is clearly not "Dissertations: A Survey of Selected Recent Theses Relevant to Combating Aging" of  Aubrey D.N.J. de Grey!!!

...or whether this is a fringe theory. More likely than not, but only up to 2009-2010.

If that is the only English language scholarly notice taken of the theory,........Well, not only in English, write scientific articles.

I think that "Reverted edits by AM Borman" is not substantiation.

AM Borman (talk) 14:30, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want to put text into a Wikipedia bio-medical article, other editors need to be able to check the sources you cite. This is a limitation of Wikipedia, due to its unique (anonymous volunteer) quality control system. Your text can be returned to this article if you can provide English language peer-reviewed journal articles or textbooks that evaluate the theory. The policy governing this is WP:MEDRS. This is not a criticism of the theory, it is a limitation of Wikipedia which frequently prevents the very latest research and thought from getting into the encyclopedia. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I have read WP:MEDRS very carefully. It is no the language restrictions. (?)

Almost all primary, secondary, and tertiary sources are on-line. (?)

AM Borman 16:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)