User talk:Din.a

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia! We have compiled some guidance for new healthcare editors:
 * 1) Please keep the mission of Wikipedia in mind. We provide the public with accepted knowledge, working in a community.
 * 2) We do that, by finding high quality secondary sources and summarizing what they say, giving WP:WEIGHT as they do.  Please do not try to build content by synthesizing content based on primary sources.  (for the difference between primary and secondary sources, see WP:MEDDEF)
 * 3) Please use high-quality, recent, secondary sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS). High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed. Please be aware that predatory publishers exist - check the publishers of articles (especially open source articles) at Beall's list.
 * 4) The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS. The section above the table of contents is called the WP:LEAD. It summarizes the body. Do not add anything to the lead, that is not in the body.  Style is covered in MEDMOS as well; we avoid the word "patient" for example.
 * 5) More generally see WP:MEDHOW
 * 6) Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
 * 7) We use very few capital letters and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
 * 8) Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities.
 * 9) Do not use URLs from your university library's internal net: the rest of the world cannot see them.
 * 10) Please include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article.
 * 11) Please format references consistently within an article and be sure to cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books; see WP:MEDHOW.
 * 12) Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
 * 13) Think carefully before working on featured articles (these have a gold star at top right). It is often hard to improve featured articles.
 * 14) Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us! Please share these guidelines with other new editors.

– the WikiProject Medicine team Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Feedback
Hi. Your edits to the Anastrozole article were reverted, and I wanted to give you some sense of what the issues were. The feedback Doc James left you is valuable, and you should take a careful look at it, but I also wanted to give you some specific feedback.

When you changed the lead section of the article from this

to this:

you removed a lot of relevant information without providing a clear rationale for doing so.

The lead section is supposed to provide an overview of the major points in the article. If you make changes to the lead of an article, make sure that you are preserving the information that's already there. If you have a reason to removing content (e.g., if it's inaccurate) make sure that you explain your reasoning. And make sure that the lead continues to reflect the body of the article.

It's important to be consistent in your usage. You created a section entitled "In females", when the other sections were titled "In men" and "In children". To begin with, you have created overlapping categories (children can be female or male). "Females" isn't really an appropriate term for humans; it's more appropriate for non-human animals, and for that reason can be seen as demeaning. The adjective "female" is fine, but "woman" and "girl" are the noun forms for humans.

When writing about medical topics, especially treatment, it's extremely important that you make sure that you stick to WP:MEDRS. You need to be very careful with statements like "This opens the potential for Anastrozole to be used as an androgen replacement therapy in the future". For starters, you need to rely on recent review articles, not 13-year-old research studies. You also need to put things in proper context - speculation should be avoided. And speculation about "the future", from a source published more than a decade ago isn't about the future any more. It's a statement about the past that either came true (and shouldn't be speculated upon) or it didn't (and shouldn't be mentioned). Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)