User talk:Tiffanyferland/sandbox

Article evaluation
The article I choose was about Precedent

'''* Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?''' The article has everything relevant to the topic itself. Reading through the article it does seem that what distracted me the most is there is a ton of information about precedent and what ties into it.

'''* Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?''' This article is very neutral. More fact base and provides links and dates that have factual proof of the information that has been written.

* Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not that I could find. ''' The links work and the sources support the claims in the article.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support 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?''' Each fact that I could find is referenced and linked with the appropriate and reliable reference source. Most that I clicked on are coming from other Wikipedia sources which also are from what I can tell reliable factual data.

'''* Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?''' I don't see anything that is out of date, however I would have to go through every source and link on the page to find if the data has been outdated.

'''* 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?''' There has been some talk about adding and removing certain subjects that tie into the article. ''' Precedent has been listed as a level-4 vital article. This article has been rated as Start-Class. This article is within the scope of a WikiProject Law.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?'''

Article Choices
I choose to edit these two articles Autoimmune Oophoritis and Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 to edit and add more specific information and facts about these two topics. I will also edit the grammar and add in more source links and cite more information needed for these topics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiffanyferland (talk • contribs) 05:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Finalize your topic / Find your sources
For my article I will be writing more in depth information and research on Autoimmune oophoritis. The reason why I choose this topic is because there is a lot of information that has been researched about this type of autoimmune issue.

I will be posting about what Autoimmune oophoritis is, what are the symptoms, and what can it do to the female body, and if there is any known treatments.

Currently on my list I have found two reliable sources.

https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/9461/autoimmune-oophoritis https://www.aarda.org/diseaseinfo/autoimmune-oophoritis/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiffanyferland (talk • contribs) 03:48, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Expand your draft - Autoimmune Oophoritis
Autoimmune Oophoritis

Autoimmune Oophoritis is a rare autoimmune disease where the body's immune system mistakenly attacks the ovaries. This causes the ovaries to have inflammation, atrophy and fibrosis. The changes to the ovaries can cause them to not function properly.

Symptoms:


 * Primary amenorrhea - This is where menstruation has never occurred
 * Secondary amenorrhea - This is where menstruation occurred once puberty happened but then later stopped
 * Infertility
 * Sex hormone deficiency
 * Lower abdominal pain
 * Fever
 * Malaise
 * Vaginal discharge
 * Irregular bleeding or absent menstrual period - Also known as Amenorrhea
 * Symptoms that are related to cysts

Causes: The underlying cause of Autoimmune Oophoritis is unknown. In many cases Autoimmune Oophoritis can be associated with lupus, pernicious anemia, myasthenia gravis, other autoimmune conditions, and can be part of autoimmune polyglandular syndrome type I and type II.

Diagnoses: Diagnosis involves a special blood test which looks for anti-steroid or anti-ovarian antibodies, a pelvic ultrasound to look for enlarged cystic ovaries and tests to rule out other possible causes of Primary Ovarian Insufficiency(POI).

Treatment: No immunosuppressive has been proven safe and effective by prospective randomized placebo-controlled study. There are few reports on a successful ovulation-inducing treatment with high dosages of corticosteroids.

Draft feedback
Hi Tiffany!

I've just read your article draft, and so far you are working with a clear outline and adding helpful material. You're also doing a really nice job connecting the material you're adding to other relevant pages on Wikipedia. My biggest suggestions as you continue working on this are: --keep filling in your outline sections. More material is the biggest thing this article needs --be careful to cite material in the text of your article and to give complete citations (a reference section) at the end of your article. The in-text citations in particular are much easier to do as you're first adding material than trying to remember where you got a specific piece of information after the fact --after you've completed the full draft, a careful proofread would be a good idea (I tripped up over a couple bits of language when reading this, most notably "...can cause them to abnormally function properly").

I hope these notes help some, and I look forward to seeing what else you add to this article! Nicoleccc (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2018 (UTC)