Talk:Oligohydramnios

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Oligohydramnios. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130218201856/http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/ip/IP338overview.pdf to http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/ip/IP338overview.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Article Evaluation
Question                                  	Comment
Initial analysis of the article's content?	
* This is a start-class article that provides room for expansion of content. Wikipedia has a banner on the page that state the content and references require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standard.
* There is a starting outline that is missing key subsections.
* The tone is neutral.
* There are some existing references that could be updated and added to.
How will you improve the article?         	
* Add content to the lead section
* Add subsections for diagnosis and management
* Add images
* Update the references
Aziz.hadia (talk) 02:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  TCOM Medical Student Editing Oligohydramnios 

message: General info
Whose work are you reviewing? Aziz.hadia/Oligohydramnios
Peer Review
Lead:
* I think the lead of this article is beautiful
* Great flow and hit all the main points
Content:
* Content is also impressive but I do feel you could add more links to some of the more difficult terms. To a person in the medical field, it perfectly understandable, but it may be more difficult for the average user to follow. I believe links to terms will help with this.
Tone and balance:
* Tone is appropriate and unbiased
Sources and references:
* I noticed there are a couple of sources from UpToDate. I wanted to use this source as well but was worried that not everyone would have access to it. Also, when I tried to add a source from UpToDate it would not let me. This may be something we should talk with Dr. Ewing about. UpToDate as the most reliable data on epidemiology for my paper so I am definitely an advocate for using it.
Organization:
* I thought the article had good flow and was easy to follow. I really liked your use of subheadings under the headings to split up the information. Definitely made it easy on the eyes.
Images and media:
* I know this is an unfinished product so I'm not sure if you were planning to add images, but I do think it would be great if you did! I know it's difficult to add images to Wikipedia but hopefully you can find at least one to show visually representation of Oligohydramnios or at least what amniotic fluid looks like on ultrasound.
Overall impressions:
* You clearly put a lot of effort into this article and I think, even unfinished, it is very well done! Great job!
-- Hollireynolds7 (talk) 17:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review