Template:Did you know nominations/Milk allergy


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 23:36, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Milk allergy

 * ... that in the United States, children ages 2–17 with milk allergy are shorter than their non-allergic peers? In Prognosis section, reference Robbins
 * ALT1:... that milk allergy is not the same as lactose intolerance? In Diagnosis section, references Heine and Deng
 * Reviewed: Oriental Basin pocket gopher

Improved to Good Article status by David notMD (talk). Self-nominated at 04:07, 15 February 2018 (UTC).


 * reviewing Whispyhistory (talk) 14:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , reviewing in process, good article, I added couple of links. Copyvio >60%[], see 2 paragraphs needing citation. Whispyhistory (talk) 14:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Added use of existing citations in the places identified as needing citations. Working on the copyvio. I had copied text and citations from Food allergy article, attributing to that source. Now, I see that the most egregious section of copying and close paraphrasing pertaining to early and late stages - was copied from the Allergy article to Food allergy (and then by me to Milk allergy). For all three uses, the Wikipedia citations are to Janeway, Grimbaldeston and Holt. I intend to look at the source you identified in the copyvio to consider whether that came from copying Wikipedia or vice versa. If the latter, I will reword the text in Milk allergy and add that reference as a citation. And, I suppose, do the same for Food Allergy and Allergy (sigh). Thank you for catching this. David notMD (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Ha! and Ha Ha!! I went to the source of the content that appears to have been copied or closely paraphrased into the allergy articles. It is a blog created by Rajiv Desai, MD. http://drrajivdesaimd.com/ At the blog, Dr. Desai explicitly states that he copied material from other sources "Yes, I have to take some content from other websites, books, journals and media but these are factual contents and not creative contents; and I do not claim it to be my original work. Free education and research is neither plagiarism nor infringement of copyright." Based on this, I conclude that Dr. Desai sourced content from the Allergy article rather than the reverse being true. David notMD (talk) 15:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)