User talk:Stevenvpham

Welcome!

Hello, Stevenvpham, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Omar's Review

• The added section thoroughly describes an important option for the management of certain terminal illnesses. The edit elucidates on a topic that was previously not discussed in this article.
• The team has achieved its overall goals for improvement. As mentioned before, the section explain the process involved in transplant as an alternative for those with specific terminal illnesses, which was not previously discussed in this article.
• The added section presents a neutral point of view based on up to date medical guidelines and current literature reviews.

Gomezestro (talk) 20:49, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Note about studies

Hi! I wanted to give you a head's up, as I saw that you used studies as sources. Be very cautious with studies as they're seen as primary sources for any of the research, theories, or conclusions created by its author(s). As such, it needs a secondary source that reviews the study or covers the specific study claim that's used in the article. The training module on health and psychology related topics covers this. However that said, if the studies had literature reviews or did a general review of existing literature (or the lack thereof), you can use that as long as you don't use anything that is specific to this study. In other words, if they did a general review on the literature and stated that there weren't many studies out there, that is OK to use since it isn't a theory unique to the study they conducted. However if they were to review a piece of literature and say that it's proof that their study is needed or helps prove their claims, that shouldn't be used. I hope this makes sense - using studies is kind of a tricky area to navigate on Wikipedia. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

• Offhand your work looks good, it's just the studies you have to be careful about, especially as this is a medicine related article. You can get more info from the module as well as from the page on the medical sourcing guidelines. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)