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.
|
| This is a subpage of Suhasini66's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
 | This user page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
}
major points edit
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 edit
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)
major points edit
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 edit
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)
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)
Userified edit
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)