User:Celsisa/sandbox

bold bold

Article evaluation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligodendroglioma

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? --Everything in the article is relevant to the article topic, but the "Research Foundation and Community" was a bit distracting. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? --The article is neutral. There are not any claims that seem heavily biased toward a certain position. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? --There are not any overrepresented viewpoints. Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? --One of the links did not work, but most of them did. The sources support the claims in the article. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? --Each fact is referenced with an appropriate, reliable references from unbiased scientific articles for the most part. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? --There was a reference from 2008 that was out of date. Some newer references could be added to make the article more up to date. Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? --People are speaking about personal experiences. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? --This article is mid rated. It does not seem to be part of any WikiProjects. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? --The way Wikipedia discusses this topic differs from the way we've talked about tumors in class in that it includes more of a scientific basis instead of incorporating anecdotes along with the easier to study scientific vocabulary.

Wikipedians often talk about "content gaps." What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them? --A "content gap" seems to be an absence of information that is pertinent to the article. Some possible ways to identify them are when information is missing that seems to be necessary for the full understanding of the article. What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them? --Some reasons a content gap might arise is if there is not a proper transition from one section to another and some ways to remedy them are to properly go from one idea to the next with proper information to transition. Does it matter who writes Wikipedia? --No, it does not matter who writes Wikipedia as long as they are unbiased and find reliable sources to back up their information. What does it mean to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"? --What it means to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia is to not put in your own opinions when it comes to the topic you are discussing. This is very similar to my definition of "bias" which means that you are opinionated and leaning towards a certain side of something.

Good job grade A RJBazell (talk) 18:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I plan to contribute a broader view of lumpectomies in the "Lumpectomy" article. I plan to include more information on the actual procedure of a lumpectomy as well as the history behind it and the effect that it caused in the progression of future cancer treatments.

Potential Bibliography: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12393820 https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/lumpectomy/about/pac-20394650 https://www.cancer.org/cancer/breast-cancer/treatment/surgery-for-breast-cancer.html https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28391871

Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why? -They can be biased and contain false information.

What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company? -A company would want to put their "best foot forward" and therefore express information that is biased in their favor as well as trying to benefit whoever is working alongside them.

What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism? -A copyright violation is when something is used without the user's permission that has placed a copyright on that thing to associate it with a company, brand, or the producer. Plagiarism is the direct copying of something and passing it off as one's own creation.

What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism? -Some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism are to fully understand the material before writing about it, trying to summarize in a coherent matter instead of explaining word for word what something is trying to say in different, but similar words, and saying ideas in a unique matter that is different but still related to the original work.

First draft edits
Copied from Lumpectomy article for editing purposes: "Lumpectomy (sometimes known as a tylectomy) is a surgical removal of a discrete portion or "lump" of breast, usually in the treatment of malignant tumor or breast cancer. It is considered a viable breast conservation therapy, as the amount of tissue removed is limited compared to a full-breast mastectomy, and thus may have physical and emotional advantages over more disfiguring treatment. According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, lumpectomy may be performed for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), for invasive ductal carcinoma, or for other conditions.[1]

Ductal carcinoma in situ DCIS, or intraductal carcinoma, is by definition a breast cancer that is limited to the lining of the milk ducts,[2] and accounts for about 20% of breast cancer in the US.[3] Although early treatment of DCIS was similar to invasive breast cancer, involving full mastectomy and sometimes lymph node dissection, an evolution in understanding about the different kinds of breast cancer prompted investigations into the adequacy of less extreme surgical treatments. The results of an eight-year randomized clinical trial in the late 1980s showed that, although lumpectomy alone was associated with significant recurrence, lumpectomy with local radiation therapy achieved similar outcomes to total mastectomy in treatment of DCIS.[4] This was the first substantial data that showed that so-called "breast conserving therapy" was a real possibility.

After a lumpectomy is performed for DCIS, local radiation therapy is typically performed to help eliminate microscopic-level disease. Axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy, as a method of screening for metastatic disease in otherwise non-invasive DCIS, is falling out of favor because the risks of procedure outweigh any effect on outcomes.[5] For DCIS, chemotherapy is not recommended, but tamoxifen may be recommended for tumors which contain an abundance of estrogen receptors.[6]

Invasive ductal carcinoma For patients with invasive ductal carcinoma who have lumpectomies, lymph node biopsy and radiation therapy are usually recommended. Adjuvant chemotherapy is often recommended, but it may not be recommended if the tumor is small and there are no lymph node metastases. For larger tumors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be recommended."

Lumpectomy
"Lumpectomy (sometimes known as a tylectomy) is a surgical removal of a discrete portion or "lump" of breast, usually in the treatment of malignant tumor or breast cancer. It is considered a viable breast conservation therapy, as the amount of tissue removed is limited compared to a full-breast mastectomy, and thus may have physical and emotional advantages over more disfiguring treatment." Sometimes a lumpectomy may be used to either confirm or rule out that cancer has actually been detected. A lumpectomy is usually recommended to patients who have detected their cancer early on and do not have enlarged tumors. Although a lumpectomy is used to allow for most of the breast to be left intact, it may result in adverse affects which can include sensitivity, resulting scar tissue, pain, and possible disfiguration of the breast if the lump taken out is significant. "According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, lumpectomy may be performed for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), for invasive ductal carcinoma, or for other conditions.[1]"

Examples of cancers treated
"Ductal carcinoma in situ DCIS, or intraductal carcinoma, is by definition a breast cancer that is limited to the lining of the milk ducts,[2] and accounts for about 20% of breast cancer in the US.[3] Although early treatment of DCIS was similar to invasive breast cancer, involving full mastectomy and sometimes lymph node dissection, an evolution in understanding about the different kinds of breast cancer prompted investigations into the adequacy of less extreme surgical treatments. The results of an eight-year randomized clinical trial in the late 1980s showed that, although lumpectomy alone was associated with significant recurrence, lumpectomy with local radiation therapy achieved similar outcomes to total mastectomy in treatment of DCIS.[4] This was the first substantial data that showed that so-called "breast conserving therapy" was a real possibility.

After a lumpectomy is performed for DCIS, local radiation therapy is typically performed to help eliminate microscopic-level disease. Axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy, as a method of screening for metastatic disease in otherwise non-invasive DCIS, is falling out of favor because the risks of procedure outweigh any effect on outcomes.[5] For DCIS, chemotherapy is not recommended, but tamoxifen may be recommended for tumors which contain an abundance of estrogen receptors.[6]

Invasive ductal carcinoma For patients with invasive ductal carcinoma who have lumpectomies, lymph node biopsy and radiation therapy are usually recommended. Adjuvant chemotherapy is often recommended, but it may not be recommended if the tumor is small and there are no lymph node metastases. For larger tumors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be recommended."

Procedure
A lumpectomy involves a surgery where a tumor is excised along with the "margin" surrounding it. The margin is the healthy, noncancerous tissue that is next to the tumor. A pathologist analyzes the margin excised by the lumpectomy to detect any possible cancer cells. A cancerous margin is "positive" while a healthy margin is "clean" or "negative". A re-excision lumpectomy is performed if the margin is detected to be positive. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) may be used to determine if the cancer has progressed away from the breast and into other parts of the body. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is the analysis of a few removed sentinel nodes for the presence of cancerous cells. A radioactive substance is used to dye the sentinel nodes for easy identification and removal. If cancer is detected in the sentinel node then further treatment is needed. Axillary node dissection involves the excision of lymph nodes connected to the tumor by the armpit(Axilla). Radiation is usually used in conjunction with the lumpectomy to prevent future recurrence. The radiation treatment can last five to seven weeks following the lumpectomy. Although the lumpectomy with radiation helps to decrease the risk of the cancer returning, it is not a cure and cancer may still come back.

History
Bernard Fisher was the first person to compare the effectiveness of a lumpectomy to William Stewart Halstead's radical mastectomy. Halstead believed that cancer spread from a singular source while Fisher thought of the disease to be "systemic", meaning that the origin of the cancer cannot exactly be known. Fisher thought that treatments such as hormone therapy or chemotherapy were more appropriate for a disease that can affect the entire body. With this came the idea of a lumpectomy, which could remove a small tumor and potentially stop the cancer from spreading if it had not metastasized yet.

Discussion Questions: Thinking about Wikipedia
1. What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?

I think that Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality" is appropriate due to the way that if information is to be distributed to the general population it is important that it be unbiased and fair.

2. What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?

The impacts of Wikipedia as a source of information is that incorrect information could be distributed that would lead people to severely change their lives and the fact that it is easy for information to be distributed to a large amount of people. However, the limits of Wikipedia as a source of information is the lack of specific information for many topics.

'''3. On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?'''

The sources that his excludes includes news articles, information about something from their own website (such as a Wikipedia article on Fanta using information from the Fanta website), and primary sources that may be more biased than informative. Using these sources could lead to very biased views that may portray a certain thing in an unreliable light.

'''4. If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?'''

If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, its content may be more generalized since a large amount of the information now on Wikipedia may not be known yet and may be more biased towards a certain opinion that was popular at that time. If Wikipedia were written 100 years from now, it would have a much greater amount of detailed information as well as many more articles on new topics that have yet to be discovered.

Peer Review
Hey! I really like your article so far! You're doing a great job of adding new sections and sources. You're also succeeding in making the article sound very neutral and like a normal Wikipedia article. I think really the main thing that can be done is to just flesh out the sections more. You can add a lot more about the history of the lumpectomy and the controversy around it to make readers realize how much of a big deal this change was for breast cancer patients and society alike. Just make sure with those additions to remain neutral like you have thus far. Also, considering you didn't make any changes to the "Examples of cancers treated", you might want to think about if that section is really needed to the article and if not how to make it needed or whether you should remove it. Also, think about the order of your sections as well. So far, though this is a really nice article because it's very informative and easy to understand! Great job!