User talk:Imunoz02/sandbox

Hphan10 (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2019 (UTC)== Review - Hieu Phan ==

Reviewer 1 Hieu Phan

Abstract: You addressed all the bullet points for the abstract part of this section. It is very concise and did not included any unnecessary information.
 * Hallmark Features/Key characteristics
 * Main Idea
 * Definitions of the disease
 * One complete paragraph consisting of 300 words or less
 * Alternate names

Signs and Symptoms: Again, you addressed all the bullet points for the signs and symptoms section. I can't really say much besides the extremely detailed section in addition to the subcategories.
 * Clear and Concise
 * Signs and symptoms found in patients with the disease and associated conditions
 * Is there variation in the signs or symptoms, and if so, why?

Cause: Due to the nature of the disease, this section was quite short compared to the previous ones; however, it is possible to go (if there is available data) on how has it affected the sexes
 * Identify Main Cause: How the disease occurred including Environmental causes, genetic factors
 * Include any (medical) associations related to Main Cause
 * Include diagram explaining cause of disease if relevant

Mechanism/Pathophysiology: Mechanism with detailed descriptions. Successful at explaining the physiology Maybe further explain tie in the mechanism with the mutation sections.
 * Define Mechanism
 * Explain Physiology Involved and Its Effect On The Body
 * Possible pathway or signaling cascade if known
 * Explain possible interactions of different body systems due to the disease.

Diagnosis: Good start on the diagnosis section; however, you simply just started the generic molecular methods. If possible, you could breakdown each methods and how each method diagnosis this disease.
 * Testing Available
 * Family/Medical History
 * Include brief overall sentence that gives general diagnostic method
 * include classification if there are different "types" of the disease

Overall, the wiki article feels very professional and nicely done. Clinical images from primary reviews would greatly enhance the presentation and understanding of the disease. Good job!

Hey Ivette,

Great job on your wiki article I feel you added a lot to your article considering it is a rare disease. Just a few things I wanted to suggest to you are proof-reading because I found a few grammatically incorrect sentences and get rid of the last few sentences in the abstract since they mention diagnosis and treatment but I feel like you can just mention that in those sections of the article. The causes section was a bit short so I am not sure if you would be able to expand further on that and include a bit more information in the diagnosis section as well. Overall good job!!---Jsanti21 (talk) 00:14, 16 November 2019 (UTC)–––

Sweiner02 (talk) 04:47, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Needs a lot more linking to other wikipedia articles.
 * There's some more recent research that I would like to see included in that section. It looks like this part hasn't been updated in a while.
 * I like the additions you have done in the symptoms.
 * It looks like the base article has a lot of good information, but could use some editing. Don't assume that just because it was there before it's well written. Take some time to improve clarity.