User talk:Jasani.5

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 16)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Jasani.5/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:Jasani.5 Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timtrent&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:Jasani.5 reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle  Faddle  10:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Gut flora
Thanks for your additions to the gut flora article. Just a few bits of feedback


 * When discussing fecal transplants, terms like "poop pills" are a bit too colloquial for an encyclopaedia (and, given the mechanism of at least some transplants, it's also misleading).
 * You added a section about probiotic use that's unreferenced. That's not good in itself, but since this section seems to be making health claims ("...take probiotics...to help digest, metabolism, and make efficient use of their food. While others...take it to maintain a stronger immune system, a healthy gastrointestinal tract, and efficient abundant microbiota") this is definitely problematic.
 * What source are you citing to support the "therapeutic worms" bit? Is it this article? Looking at the abstract, it doesn't seem to be about therapeutic worms. The addition isn't clear, but it seems like it's overstating the generality of what's at best a new and unproven therapy. We have an article on helminthic therapy which suggests that the technique is far less developed than your edits suggest.

Bear in mind that medical-related topics should be consistent with the WP:MEDRS guideline. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Response

 * In this format, a formal scientific word such as pills that contain fecal mater from a different host is definitely more credible than poop pills
 * My scientific inferences and opinions should be removed to keep the gut flora page on Wikipedia completely factual and highly scientific (so that this wiki search has full credibility from primary sources)
 * I may have used more of my own knowledge from our evolution class to add to the edit on the article. But I would back the article on the helminthic therapy to explain how worms are used therapeutically.

Jasani.5 (talk) 21:24, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Jasani.5/sandbox


Hello, Jasani.5. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "sandbox".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)