User talk:RMFMed/Borrelia miyamotoi

Peer Review
Overall, you did a great job covering a broad range of aspects for this species. It was all objective and appropriate for this article type. I had a few suggestions/ideas I considered while reading. You can consider including how patients are typically diagnosed. It sounds like there isn't a specific test but if it is a diagnosis of exclusion, you can state there in that section. Another consideration is too include a common differential diagnosis with the general symptoms listed under your "clinical presentation" section. This is not necessary as you did a great job explaining everything. Stp20 (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing heads up
Hi there, one of our sourcing tools noticed that a few of the sources on your sandbox draft don't meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliable sources. In particular the journals Microorganisms, Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, and Frontiers in Immunology have not met the Wikipedia community's requirements for reliability. I would recommend removing those sources and finding more reliable sources. It's not always easy to tell what a good sources vs what isn't. In this case one of our sourcing tools identified this as an unreliable source. If you want a refresher on reliable sources, you may recall that the Evaluating articles training module discusses examples of what is a good source and what isn't. If you have any question, feel free to let me know. Will (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)