Talk:Wolfram syndrome

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Molecular Biology: Genetics This article 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 articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance). Medicine: Genetics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Medical genetics task force.

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 Wolfram syndrome. 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 article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 June 2024 and 17 August 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nbdo, Jdoan22, HanDinh2026, Edere00 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: VictoriaYan.ucsf, Jzhang33, Jyeh06, RYou.SOP, Edere00, AlissaZ.

— Assignment last updated by Health Economics and Policy (talk) 21:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goals:

Add/Review citations

All work on causes section

Nhi: Diagnosis

Elena: treatment/research

Han: prognosis

Josephine: wp2

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20051115194016/http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene=wfs1. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. ⸺RandomStaplers 06:01, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Looks like it actually is public domain, [1] despite the fact that Medline plus copyright is... complicated. Changing copyright templates. ⸺RandomStaplers 06:11, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Person A: Victoria Yan

1.The group's edits do substantially improve the article. They have a lead that reflects the new information added. The content added is relevant to the topic. Victoria Yan 7/26

2. The group has achieved its overall goals for improvement. They added more citations and now have 25 citations. The causes section is very expanded and contains a lot of important information. Each member worked on their part of the article. Victoria Yan 7/26

3a. The draft submission reflects a neutral point of view. The information is very scientific and straight to the point. All the text is informational and does not push forth an agenda or specific opinion. Causes section describes in good detail how the condition arises. The treatment section mentions several different therapies being tested, but does not point to which one is the best. Victoria Yan 7/26 VictoriaYan.ucsf (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Person B: Janeene Yeh

1. Yes, the group has contributed to edits that substantially improve the article. This is shown by how the new descriptive content is supported by evidence from reliable sources referenced below. Janeene Yeh 7/29

2. Yes, the group has achieved its overall goals for improvement as seen by the addition of citations that back up their content, and the contribution of each member to the Causes section of the article. Janeene Yeh 7/29

3b. Yes, the claims included are verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available because I checked that the sources are linked correctly and are as current as possible. Janeene Yeh 7/29

Person C: Janny Zhang

1. Yes, the group's edits substantially improve the article. The additional information is broken down well and easy to understand. Janny Zhang 7/30

2. Yes, the overall goal of improvement has been met. The article has new, relevant sources to support. The included graphic is also relevant and adds to my understanding of the topic. Janny Zhang 7/30

3C. Yes, the article is divided into headings and subheadings when appropriate and follows a logical order. Janny Zhang 7/30 Jzhang33 (talk) 17:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Person D: Alissa Zhao 1. Yes, the group has made significant edits to this page that have made numerous contributions to the content available regarding this topic. The new information they added is well stated and well sourced. Alissa Zhao 7/31 2. Yes, this group has met their overall goal. The article has been improved significantly with ample new information that comes from quality sources and is written in an easily digestible manner. Alissa Zhao 7/31 3D. Yes, this group addressed the potential disabilities associated with this syndrome in a very professional and inclusive manner. Their language use is very appropriate to be inclusive of all who may come across this page. Alissa 7/31 — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlissaZ (talk • contribs) 20:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Person E: Rebekah You 1. Yes, the group's edits substantially improve the article. They added a lot of additional information under each section and each section is well explained. 2. This group achieved its overall goals for improvement. They used a lot of references to support each section. Every section especially the diagnosis section is well explained. 3c. The edits are formatted consistent with Wikipedia's manual of style. Each section is bolded and they include the citation within the paragraph as well. The graphics are added to the article as well to help readers better understand the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RYou.SOP (talk • contribs) 23:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]