User:Elodieme/sandbox

Week 4, Article Evaluation
Trypanosoma brucei https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trypanosoma_brucei

Everything is relevant, but the way some things are written seems out of place (for example, the "life cycle" section) No. The Hpr section contains no references. The information comes mostly from published papers, though some are from governmental websites. The sources are neutral. The link works and supports claims in the article. Revisions come up a couple times, and one user suggested that some of the information on the trypanosomatid and trypanosoma pages would be appropriate on the T. brucei page. Another point that came up was red links, and there seems to be some disagreements regarding them on this page (and somebody got blocked or something?). It looks like a personal facebook post about Wikipedia red links somehow appeared on the talk page. It is rated as C-class on the quality scale, and Mid-importance on the importance scale. It is part of WikiProject Medicine. It is rated as C-class on the quality scale, and high-importance on the importance scale. It is part of WikiProject Microbiology.
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * 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?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * 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?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

Week 5, Possible topics
Topic One: Entamoeba hystolytica Area of improvement: Transmission (maybe rewording and adding more info)

Topic 2: Brucella melitensis Areas of improvement: Honestly adding sections, maybe transmission and pathology?

Topic 3: Bordetella pertussis Areas of improvement: Adding more sections, like transmission and treatment — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elodieme (talk • contribs) 22:33, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

= Draft =

Symptoms in animals
In goats and sheep, Brucella melitensis can cause abortion, stillbirth, and weak offspring for the first gestation after the animal is infected. The infection can also reduce milk yield by at least 10%. The placenta might also be retained, and the animal can suffer from purulent vaginal discharge. In males, the infection can cause acute orchitis and epididymitis, and in turn infertility. Arthritis can also occur. Brucellosis can be confirmed with the help of postmortem lesions in the reproductive tract, udders, and supramammary lymph nodes. While these are not pathognomonic for brucellosis, they can help farmers determine if their herd is infected.

Transmission in Animals
Brucella melitensis is transmitted by the stable fly. It can also infect other animals through contact with the placenta, fetus, fetal fluids, and vaginal discharge of infected animals.

In Humans
Brucella melitensis can be transmitted to humans through ingestion of contaminated dairy products. There have been a handful of reported human to human infections. In May 1991, a man was admitted to a hospital in Quebec with a 4-week history of fever, chills, night sweats, dry cough, lower abdominal discomfort, and a 3kg weight loss. These symptoms started 2 weeks after he came back from Germany and Syria. It was revealed that he was infected after ingesting unpasteurized goat cheese. He was treated with ceftriaxone, but due to a persistent fever, rifampin 450mg and doxycycline 100mg bid by mouth were added. The man stopped treatment after a month. The patient was in remission for 7 months, and developed the same symptoms again despite not traveling. He was given the same treatment for two months, and was in remission for over 12 months after. 2 months after the patient's recurrence, the man's wife developed similar symptoms. Blood cultures showed the presence of Brucella melitensis, and she received the same treatment. The wife had not traveled outside of the country. Sexual transmission was postulated, since the couple had sex without using a barrier method. Furthermore, the wife developed symptoms 2 months after the husband's recurrence, which is the incubation period.