Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medical Genetics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Should we care about multifactorial diseases? Mitocondrial ones? NCurse work 20:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
- Any genetic influence on disease should ideally be recognised, it depends on the resources of the project as to the extent of cover. --apers0n 08:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Genetic medicine?
The article Medical genetics says: Genetic medicine is a newer (and some would say more fitting) term for medical genetics. The difference (if there is one) should ideally be explained on the main project page --apers0n 10:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- To be honest, my main project in science is medical genetics and genetic medicine, but I can't tell you the difference. :) I think showing that they're similar expressions is enough. NCurse work 17:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- There is a difference to me. Medical genetics is the study of how genetics affects humans with a particular eye towards disorders. Genetic medicine means (to me) using genetics to treat diseases and disorders: Anti-sense therapy, designer drugs, GMOs, etc. Of course, I come from a genetic background, as opposed to a medical background. Maybe that makes a difference. TedTalk/Contributions 17:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
A couple of suggestions for user boxes here - does the project need one, if so does anyone have a preference?
- WOW! They're cool! In my opinion all of the three could be used by the users. If you don't mind I put them on the main page of the project. NCurse work 17:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Medical Disorders stub
So, as I read it, the article on Mitochondrial Eve would not fit in as a medical disorders stub. In my mind, it could fit as a medical genetics stub. What about antisense therapy? viruses? antibodies? transplantation? TedTalk/Contributions 17:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Mitochondrial Eve is a genetics stub. Antisense therapy should be medical genetics stub. But viruses, antibody will never be genetics stub, or topic. I ask for a medical genetics stub type, if you show me at least 10 articles. I couldn't find as much... NCurse work 20:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I added my comment on the stub page, but genetic conditions works far better for me. Sandy 18:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- I expressed there, condition is too wide. Disorder is between disease and condition. NCurse work 20:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- The Asperger's people get pretty touchy about the terminology. Lots of TS people object to disorder, but they have a weaker case than "Asperger syndrome", since the DSM name is "Tourette's disorder". The Asperger's people may reject the disorder term. Sandy 21:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- Impossible to have everyone agreed. :) NCurse work 21:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- It is for stubs. The Asperger syndrome people will never see it. TedTalk/Contributions 13:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tourette syndrome
Just wanted to add a note that I need a couple of more weeks to work on it: it's not quite ready for review. I have to finish some copy-editing, some referencing, and writing some large missing chunks (I was going to add a thorough discussion of comorbids under "Screening", as it's important to pick them up when tics are present). Pathophysiology needs to be beefed up. Guidance on anything else I need to do would help. I'm also not sure on the copyright/Fair Use status on images: that is not an area I understand well.Sandy 18:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] genetic testing
As genetic counceling is in the list of main articles, chouldn't Genetic testing be as well ?? Leevanjackson 10:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tagging talk pages and assessing articles
Hi. If you still have work to do tagging talk pages and assessing articles, my AWB plugin might be of interest to you.
The plugin has two main modes of operation:
- Tagging talk pages, great for high-speed tagging
- Assessments mode, for reviewing articles (pictured)
As of the current version, WikiProjects with simple "generic" templates are supported by the plugin without the need for any special programatic support by me. I've had a look at your project's template and you seem to qualify.
For more information see:
- About the plugin
- About support for "generic" WikiProject templates
- User guide
- About AWB (AutoWikiBrowser)
Hope that helps. If you have any questions or find any bugs please let me know on the plugin's talk page. --Kingboyk 14:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gene Modulation
Does gene modulation with artificial transcription factors come under 'medical genetics'. --Username132 (talk) 19:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Maghazaji syndrome deleted
This genetic disorder stub was recently deleted after a prod: "Possible vanity article, single medical paper written in 1983, sole link's webmaster appears to be related to Prof. Maghazaji or is Prof. Maghazaji." Most Google hits are from the deleted Wikipedia page. Should we reinstate the page? The contents were as follows (from the Google cache):
Maghazaji syndrome is a human genetic disorder that is characterised as the combination of two congenital disorders hemifacial microsomia and partial gigantism. It was described in an Iraqi family by Professor Haider Maghazaji.
Reference
Maghazaji HI. 1983. Hemifacial microsomia associated with congenital partial gigantism. Dev Med Child Neurol. 25:798-800. PMID 6653913
External links
Maghazaji syndrome
This genetic disorder article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
This disease article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Categories: Proposed deletion as of 12 September 2006 | All articles proposed for deletion | Disease stubs | Genetic disorders | Eponymous diseases | Genetic disorder stubs --apers0n 18:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New categories?
There is a suggestion on Talk:Dominance relationship to merge several articles into one, which seems like a good idea but will need a lot of wikilinks redirected. The article is also heavy with lists, I made the following comment there:
"Rather than having endless lists in article with dominant and recessive disorders/conditions, what about creating new categories Category:Autosomal recessive disorders and Category:Autosomal dominant disorders, perhaps even Category:X-linked disorders? Or else move the lists to a list of dominant and recessive disorders article." --apers0n 11:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- The article Mitochondrial disease could be the basis for a Category:Mitochondrial diseases --apers0n 08:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Preimplantation genetic diagnosis
This article plus Preimplantation Genetic Haplotyping probably should not be in the Genetic disorders category, is there a category to group them together?
[edit] Ascertainment bias
Is anyone here able to spend some time in ascertainment bias? It is really in dismal shape. Sandy 15:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- I've cleaned up the language and added it to the requests for review on the main MEDGENP page. --apers0n 17:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks - better already! Sandy 17:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merging articles?
Please have a look at that: User_talk:Petaholmes#Merging_articles. The problem is that Petaholmes wants to merge Chromosome banding with karyotype. But I think they're not exactly the same things. Please comment. NCurse work 06:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 23:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Our main listing on the Council Directory is under Biology, with a sub-listing under Clinical Medicine - I wonder if it would be better the other way round? I've also added our listing on the Medicine portal to the Council Directory page. --apers0n 05:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:MEDMOS needs YOU!
The Manual of Style (Medicine-related articles) is entering a critical stage: I'm informing people to visit the page, make corrections where possible, and then state there support or disagreements on the talk page, so we can see if there is consensus to turn this proposed guideline into a consensus-supported guideline.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] SLITRK1
Does anyone here know how to deal with the context tag that was placed at SLITRK1 ? Thanks, Sandy (Talk) 22:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Chimera (genetics) needs this project's attention
Will this project please take on Chimera (genetics) as one of its monitored pages? The article has been getting a lot of attention lately from people who saw a TV show and who add fairly uninformed junk. It could really use more serious editors' attention. Thanks! — coelacan talk — 19:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Where is everyone?
I'm surprised no one from here has watched what has happened to Down syndrome during its stint on the main page, or discussed some of the changes proposed on the talk page. Sandy (Talk) 10:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] FAC for DNA
Hi there. This article is now a candidate for a featured article. Any comments or suggestions would be welcome on its nomination page here. Thank you. TimVickers 23:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] MCOTW
Why don't we attack Medicine Collaboration of the Week in order to get our most important articles improved? NCurse work 12:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Seems we are to an extent ? To be fair we should just put up one article amongst the nominations to give them a chance :) Leevanjackson 18:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, apers0n and me have been busy in real life, but now I'm back in business. :) I nominate some of our articles, then let you know about it here. NCurse work 18:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
