Talk:Candida albicans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Candida albicans article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Biology Portal Candida albicans is part of WikiProject Microbiology, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Microbiology and microbiology-related topics. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page to find other ways of helping.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High	This article is on a subject of high-importance within microbiology.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Recents edits emphasizing risk

The recent edits by 24.64.223.203 contain some strong, but unsourced claims. Someone who knows the subject might want to check this. Rl 08:49, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't really know about it per se, but it sounds like the alternative medicine claptrap used to sell Candida treaments to people. As far as references, from what I've seen they're almost all from books published by treatment purveyors, with no scholarly journal articles. I'll edit the 2nd paragraph to tone down POV and present it as the opinion of alternative medicine proponents. --KSevcik 16:04, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like rubbish to me. Anyone using allopathy to describe mainstream medicine is asking for trouble. Also had at look at his/her talk page. Not exactly exemplary!!! If you could incorporate this somehow objectively then that would be excellent! -- postglock 05:26, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Phenotypic switching

I'm a little confused as to whether Phenotypic switching "is" dimorphism or if it is similar to it. I am going to remove the line declaring that it IS dimorphism for now since the next paragraph starts with an apparent contradiction to this statement. If someone can give me any input in favor against this edit, i would appreciate it Dinosaurdarrell 05:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sexual fungus?

hey! i am sorry, but c. albicans is not really a sexual fungus! it is rathter classified as an asexual fungus, as no meiosis has been described for this yeast. C. albicans has only a parasexual cycle, which has only been observed in vitro.

But i dont know how to update the page! Can you help me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.13.144.74 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

Just go back to the article and click on edit this page, make the change, explain what you did in the edit summary line, and click Save page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pyrospirit (talk • contribs) 18:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC).