User talk:Suhasini66/Parkinson's Disease Biomarkers

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Suhasini66/Parkinson's Disease Biomarkers.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This is a subpage of Suhasini66's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Medicine

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine

Neuroscience

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience

Molecular Biology: MCB

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology
	This page is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force.

}

major points

The clinical portion of the wiki page all draws from one source and I'm not sure if there could be more variety in sources. I'm not sure if the section is relevant in comparison to the rest of the article, just because it's so different in content, even though it's technically the same. There is a lot of good information here though.

minor points

Maybe vary up sentence structure in sections like Genetic Biomarkers. I think there's something weird about the sources that are cited because it goes from [1] to [8] in the first paragraph. There are a lot of terms that can be wiki-linked as said before.

Branngu (talk) 03:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

major points

Biomarkers are generally quantifiable biological agents (such as interleukins, or red blood cells, or certain proteins). The Imaging markers sections can loosely be said to contain biomarkers (as when you obtain images that document glucose consumption levels), but the Clinical markers section makes this page seem less specific to biomarkers, and more like a diagnosis page for parkinson's disease. Because some of the information within is of medical importance, be intentional with each line to make sure that those sentences that are considered medical have appropriate secondary sources.

minor points

Many of the phrases within can be wiki-leaked. Some paragraphs can be reduced to improve clarity (take a look at restructuring the GBA gene paragraph). "Sources" section should be renamed "References".Sdb27 (talk) 01:37, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Major points: The page looks pretty good so far, it's evident that you've done your research and made the page readable by average readers. I think there is definite room for more graphs/pictures (maybe of the markers or tests that you would use to identify these markers, although it is hard to create your own content/find public ones). More of the terms should be wiki-linked to other articles, especially because you're writing a new article. As for the harder, more complex terms in your page, you should either wiki-link them to existing pages (if they exist) or if they don't, write a brief description for the reader to understand. Also, I think your page could use more sources to add to its credibility.

Minor points: There is an extra "s" in the graphic at the top describing PD biomarkers. Nice job!

Seanchan26 (talk) 02:02, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Userified

Hi Suhasini66 - I have moved this into your userspace; generally you shouldn't draft in mainspace, and it is not clear that this should be a freestanding article. I suggest that you leave a note at Talk:Parkinson's disease to see how the community is likely to react to a standalone article. We love editors being bold but you also want to work with the community. Jytdog (talk) 23:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]