User:Seahorse17/sandbox

Article Evaluation: Cervical Cancer

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * I checked a few citations and all the links worked. Furthermore, I would consider the sources that the links sent me to "good" sources in accordance to Wiki's standards. They supported 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?
 * Yes, each fact is referenced with an appropriate and reliable reference. A lot of the information comes from published articles in well known medical journals such as the European Journal of Surgical Oncology.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * 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?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I didn't think that we had to respond to the questions through text, so I just went through the article and answered the questions mentally.
 * 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?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I didn't think that we had to respond to the questions through text, so I just went through the article and answered the questions mentally.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I didn't think that we had to respond to the questions through text, so I just went through the article and answered the questions mentally.

Content Gap Assignment
Now that you're thinking about what makes a "good" Wikipedia article, consider some additional questions.
 * Wikipedians often talk about "content gaps." What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them?
 * Thinking about the term itself, it is clear that it defines a gap of content which signifies that there is content which is not explained/ adressed. Regarding Wikipedia, a content gap may be a topic that is not included in Wiki. For example, when someone searches Wikipedia for information that isn't there, that would be a content gap.
 * What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them?
 * A content gap may arise for several reasons. First, main and broad topics will usually be covered in Wikipedia while very specific topics may fall in the "content gap". A content gap may also arise because the content is new; I believe this could be the case for many new scientific discoveries or such.
 * Does it matter who writes Wikipedia?
 * I believe one of the great aspects of Wikipedia is that you don't have to be a "certified" writer to be able to positively contribute to Wikipedia. Almost anyone, such as a student like me, can write for Wikipedia. So, I believe id doesn't matter who writes for Wikipedia as long as they follow Wikipedia's guidelines and standards.
 * What does it mean to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"?
 * Wikipedia wants its articles to have a neutral point of view. Therefore, the articles should document and explain the major points of view in a proportional and impartial way. This is what being "unbiased" means in terms of Wiki; only facts are conveyed. There are no personal opinions, analysis, or attempts to persuade the readers in the article. That's why Wikipedia does not want you to use sources that may contain the previous examples. Sources must published, trustful, and authoritative, and anything added to the Wiki article should be based on these published sources of information.
 * The definition of "unbiased" in Wikipedia terms is different from my own definition because I believe you can still have an opinion/ personal view on a topic while being unbiased. For me, one is unbiased when they consider all points of views and the facts clearly without being influenced by outside sources. This is different from how Wiki considers bias because even if I believe I have been unbiased in studying the topic of the article, I still cannot express my personal opinion (which I believe is unbiased) in the Wikipedia article.
 * I think it can be hard to be "unbiased" in Wikipedia's terms when the topic of your article is a polarizing one, in which it is important to explain the disagreement that surround it. However, Wikipedia addressed such a case in our training. They said that some articles might have to describe multiple points of view, and that if this happened you just need to present each view accurately, with context. You just can't impose your opinion on which side or version of the topic is the correct or best one.

Adding to an Article

 * I used the Citation Hunt tool which shows unreferenced statements from articles.
 * First, I evaluated whether the statement in question is true which it was.
 * Then I realized that all that had to be done was edit a link to another wiki page that demonstrated that the statement was correct. Below is my attempt to do so through code:
 * Treasure Hunters

Discussion: Thinking about sources and plagiarism
Assignment
 * Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why?
 * These sources are not considered reliable because they will tend to be quite biased. They are opinionated and dependent on the authors personal view on the subject.
 * What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company?
 * Primarily, the company's website is the company's website. By that I mean that the content in the website is displayed in order to make the company look good. Therefore, they may omit important information in order to boost their image.
 * Furthermore, the company's website is not like a Wikipedia article on it; it won't be very complex. For many company websites, it will be made up of an "About Us" page and technical things in regard to the company.
 * What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism?
 * The difference is that copyright infringement is using someone else's work without getting their permission. While, plagiarism is claiming a work you did not produce or using someone else's work without properly attributing it to them.
 * What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?
 * Good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism is taking notes on the subject and then returning to your notes instead of the original document when writing. Also, double checking after writing that you gave proper attribution to every fact which you took from the document.

Choose your topic / Find your sources
It's time to choose an article and assign it to yourself.
 * My chosen article: Breast cancer chemotherapy
 * this article is within the WikiProject Medicine scope
 * It has been rated as a Start Class on the quality scale
 * And, it has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale
 * Just in case I will also record other possible topics: Diet and cancer, Infectious causes of cancer, Childhood leukemia,


 * In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article.
 * Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add? Post some of your ideas to the article's talk page.
 * I think I could expand several of the sections in the article. For example, I could add more specific examples or subsections to the types section.
 * This isn't something major, but more images and visual evidence could also be added to the page.
 * There are not many sources being used. I would add more sources in order to add more material/ information on the page.
 * A new section on side effects.
 * Compile a list of relevant, reliable books, journal articles, or other sources. Post that bibliography to the talk page of the article you'll be working on, and in your sandbox. Make sure to check in on the Talk page to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography
 * These are mostly guidelines or position statements from national or international expert bodies:
 * https://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/guide/treatment-chemotherapy#1
 * http://www.nationalbreastcancer.org/breast-cancer-chemotherapy
 * https://www.breastcancercare.org.uk/information-support/facing-breast-cancer/going-through-treatment-breast-cancer/chemotherapy
 * https://www.cancer.org/cancer/breast-cancer/treatment/chemotherapy-for-breast-cancer.html
 * http://www.breastcancer.org/treatment/chemotherapy
 * Book which I'd be able to access/ get through the Yale library:
 * Breast cancer : suggested protocol guidelines for combination chemotherapy trials and for combined modality trials

My Chosen Article Editing

 * Since there isn't a lot in the original article and I want to input changes in most sections, I just copied the entire article into my sandbox.

Breast Cancer Chemotherapy
Breast cancer chemotherapy refers to the use of cytotoxic drugs (chemotherapy) in the treatment of breast cancer.

Types
There are three major types of chemotherapy.
 * Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
 * Neoadjuvant chemo is given before surgery to slow the growth of a fast growing cancer or to shrink the size of a larger breast cancer.
 * So, neoadjuvant chemo is frequently used to treat locally advanced cancers, cancers that at the time of diagnosis are too big to be removed by surgery, which can then be removed with less extensive surgery.
 * Adjuvant chemotherapy
 * Adjuvant chemo is given after surgery to reduce the risk of recurrence. So, it is used to try to kill any cancer cells that might still exist and cannot be detected through imaging tests.
 * Palliative chemotherapy
 * Palliative chemo is used to control (but not cure) the cancer in settings in which the cancer has spread beyond the breast and localized lymph nodes. See metastatic breast cancer.
 * Combined therapies
 * Combining, for example, non-drug treatments with localized chemotherapy to limit toxicity and achieve better results.

Regimens
Multiple chemotherapeutic agents may be used in combination to treat patients with breast cancer. Determining the appropriate regimen to use depends on many factors; such as, the character of the tumor, lymph node status, and the age and health of the patient.

The following is a list of some of the commonly used adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer:
 * CMF: cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil.
 * FAC (or CAF): 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide.
 * AC (or CA): Adriamycin (doxorubicin) and cyclophosphamide.
 * AC-Taxol: AC followed by paclitaxel (Taxol).
 * TAC: Taxotere (docetaxel), Adriamycin (doxorubicin), and cyclophosphamide.
 * FEC: 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide.
 * AT: Adriamycin (doxorubicin) and Taxotere (docetaxel).

Since chemotherapy affects the production of white blood cells, a granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is sometimes administered along with chemotherapy. This has been shown to reduce, though not completely prevent, the rate of infection and low white cell count. Most adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy regimens do not routinely require growth factor support except for those associated with a high incidence of bone marrow suppression and infection. These may include chemotherapy given in the dose dense fashion i.e. 2-weekly instead of 3-weekly or TAC chemotherapy (see above).

Anthracylines
By conducting a meta-analysis of four large breast cancer trials including nearly 3,000 patients, the researchers have discovered that an abnormality on chromosome 17, called CEP17, is associated with a worse outcome for patients, but also that its presence is a highly significant indicator that the tumor will respond to anthracyclines.

CEP17 is detected by a common and straightforward test (fluorescent in situ hybridisation or FISH), which is carried out routinely in breast cancer patients; it is used to test for the HER2 gene to see whether the women might benefit from the drug Herceptin. Professor Bartlett said that assessment for CEP17 could be easily carried out in the same FISH analysis as for HER2. [1 ]

Administration
For Breast Cancer, chemotherapy drugs are given into a vein (intravenously) or by mouth as tablets or capsules (orally).