Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Multiple sclerosis/archive1

Multiple sclerosis
This appears to be a relatively comprehensive, well researched and referenced article exemplifying the best of Wikipedia. Whig 08:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. While being comprehensive, the article presently has a number of shortcomings that should be addressed before it is featured. (1) It has no references to recent & thorough scientific review articles, a bit of a "must" for a tricky disease like MS. (2) The section "Cause" completely bypasses significant recent evidence on EBV, Th1/Th2 imbalance etc that should be written here. (3) Charcot's clinical triad is missing, as well as a reference to his work on MS. (4) The section "emotional aspects" is unwikified. I'm quite willing to cooperate in raising the article's standard, but I'll need help. Sadly we have no wiki-neurologists who could review the article for us and offer input. JFW | T@lk  09:10, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Not being a neurologist myself, I lack the knowledge of the up-to-the-moment research, and I think it would be a useful inclusion if someone can provide this with appropriate references. With that said, all encyclopedic content is likely to be a bit "dated" and it isn't really possible to incorporate every current strand of research in every medical article. If this is the principal blocking issue, I don't know what we can do except ask for help from someone with specific expertise in the field. As for the wikification of various sections, I'll be glad to help in any way you think needed. Whig 19:24, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * In regard to point (2) EBV and MS, this study has apparently been retracted. Also in regard to point (2) Th1/Th2 imbalance, what I have been able to find is inconclusive at present. Do we really need to include withdrawn studies and inconclusive causal theories in order to make this article featurable? Whig 05:33, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * They messed up the data, but when it was corrected the hypothesis was still supported. There are numerous other studies that found EBV seroconversion associated with MS incidence.
 * Presently the "Cause" paragraph treats the immune system like a black box. There must be data on HLA linkage and other predispositions (see for example - HLA-DRB1*1501-DQB1*0602 is associated). JFW |  T@lk  07:08, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've added a Reference section with Readings including clinical reviews which can be moved up above Readings if used as references for this article. I can email some UpToDate articles if anyone wishes to help if you email me. Petersam 06:56, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The "treatment" section is not ideally structured as a long bullet point list; it makes it look messy and encourages unstructured editing (cf. "Trivia" sections in some articles). I think paragraphs with subsections would make more sense.--Eloquence* 15:49, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object- for the reasons stated above. However, it is a good article that with some improvement could become a FA- I'll see what I can work on! Flcelloguy [[Image:Bass clef2.gif|25px|Cello today?]] Give me a note! Eighth note (crop).gif Desk 02:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. Lead is too short. Stub section: Signs and symptoms - expand. List secton: Treatment - transform into normal text. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:21, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)