lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Dysplastic nevus

message: what is "the trunk" in men?  128.122.24.42 (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: torso. --Arcadian (talk) 23:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need link to explain what is "the trunk" in men?

message: The link for footnote [9] in the biopsy section does not work. Not enough information is given to track down this link.72.66.102.110 (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: broken link in biopsy section
Talk:Erythroderma

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 01:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: The ICD-10 code given here (L26) is for exfoliative dermatitis. The ICD-10 code for erythroderma without further specification is L53.9.
Therefore this article needs some clarification of the differences and similarities between the two. Therefore tagged for rewriting. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 02:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ICD-10 Codes
Talk:Bullous pemphigoid

message: I was under the impression that this disease was caused by autoantibodies directed against hemidesmosomes, thus the linear immunostaining observed at the epithelial basement membrane.  Are we sure that collagen XVII is involved?
:Collagen XVII is a component of hemidesmosomes.  I will edit to clarify.  Jprawn 20:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I

message: External links on Wikipedia are supposed to be "encyclopedic in nature" and useful to a worldwide audience.  Please read the external links policy (and perhaps the specific rules for medicine-related articles) before adding more external links.  
The following kinds of links are inappropriate:
*  Online discussion groups or chat forums
*  Personal webpages and blogs
*  Multiple links to the same website
*  Fundraising events or groups
*  Websites that are recruiting for clinical trials
*  Websites that are selling things (e.g., books or memberships)
I realize that some links are helpful to certain users, but they still do not comply with Wikipedia policy, and therefore must not be included in the article.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Are Pemphigus and Bullous pemphigoid the same thing?  If not, how do they differ?  If so, shouldn't the two articles be merged? 82.32.238.139 (talk) 09:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: From my reading, I believe they are two different diseases.--Biolprof (talk) 17:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pemphigus and Bullous pemphigoid 

message: See:
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=palemoon&q=Bullous+pemphigoid&iax=images&ia=images  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A04:9DC0:C1:50:0:0:0:1D (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture appears to be wrong
Talk:Xeroderma

message: The book Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, published in 1911 told on page 134 claimed that xeroderma was caused by bad germoplasm.Agre22 (talk) 00:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The

message: I added a few references, but I have no idea how reliable they are, so if somebody has an objection please raise it here. Chevymontecarlo 15:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Both of these conditions appear to be about skin dryness, and should therefore me merged. Xeroderma seems to be more commonly used, according to a Google search on "Xerosis cutis" versus Xeroderma. Mikael Häggström (talk) 14:45, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[Xerosis cutis]] into [[xeroderma]]

message: The site, while apparently maintained by a doctor, is rife with typos and grammar errors. I also question the "prevention" heading which claims that using soap "every other day" will help with xeroderma. On the other hand, I am by no means an expert on any of this... what do you folks think?
As of 2013-04-04, the page referenced is no longer indexed at that site.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.112.220 (talk) 00:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: This source seems bogus

message: There seems to be a small advert snuck into the prevention section.
leica 18:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Mention of the brand Nivea is inappropriate

message: I don't know about you, but I have sensitive skin and allergies and have nasty reactions to skin creams, sunscreens, etc. 108.48.94.155 (talk) 20:07, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this Article Encouraging the Use of Skin Creams? 
Talk:Bromoderma

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 01:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 
Talk:Nikolsky's sign

message: Perhaps someone could add additional citations to this article, particularly for the "Histologic basis for the sign" section? Kilbad (talk) 20:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: References Needed

message: Is this definition correct? I'm not a professional, but is this not the definition of Asboe-Hansen sign? The Nikolsky sign is usually referred in medical literature and dictionaries as the separation of or blister formation in apparently normal skin within the epidermis by shearing stress.
:* You are correct, the existing definition was incorrect and it has been revised! --- AT_Still (talk) 05:42, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Correct Definition?

message: What is the negative nikolsky? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Negative sign

message: Note, this is just a test. 2601:584:C000:540:0:0:0:4878 (talk) 02:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikolsky's sign Is PRESENT
Talk:Dermatoscopy

message: It is pretty poor to claim dermatoscopy is great and refer to studies comparing results from using a dermatoscope with NAKED EYE examination.  I do not know ANY dermatologist who does not possess and use a basic magnifier!  Why bother doing such a study when the answer is known a priori?
More realistic to compare the diagnoses made by users of 10X illuminated dermatoscopes with diagnoses made by users of common 2.5x loupes.  The difference will be less.Petlif (talk) 03:13, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like the start of the section was, but the last sentence provides balance, IMO.  In its defense, I imagine a polarized dermatoscope is a very simple instrument, inexpensive to manufacture, and buy so I can't see much reason not to use one.  --Elvey (talk) 00:18, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Advantages of Dermatoscopy - a priori science?

message: Should talk about the iPhone dermatoscopes! or at least the y-generation of doctors should! 129.180.175.166 (talk) 04:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  iPhone dermatoscopes 

message: — Assignment last updated by Eilsiz ka (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Public Writing Fall 2022 F1
Talk:Lupus pernio

message: lupus pernio is NOT the same thing as pernio, or chilblain lupus.  It is instead a variant of sarcoidosis that presents classically around the nose, and signifies a greater chance of involvement of the aerodigestive tract.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.2.208.246 (talk) 04:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: note
Talk:Erythema toxicum neonatorum

message: We the Vanderbilt WikiMed class have had a hard time locating any open source images of this rash. If you happen to have one, could you please post it? A visual would be extremely helpful for this page.
:I find the image used to be disturbing. It is not that the baby is diapered in what appears to be a rag (very practical), since conditions are different the world over, but that adult hand that is holding up the baby's shirt appears to be extremely hypoxic and from the coloring, at death's door. Is that person okay? Alarmed, Wordreader (talk) 18:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Need an image!

message: A merge was proposed between this page and Neonatal acne. However, per  these appear to be separate conditions, and I have removed the merge tags accordingly. LT910001 (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge
Talk:Lentigo

message: The photo included does not feature lentigo. I recommend finding a picture that is actually relevant and helpful for this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.59.232 (talk) 02:29, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a couple minute spots there that may or may not be lentigo (they may be freckles), but agreed; the image is unclear and uninformative. Xander T. (talk) 03:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subject Photo
Talk:Transepidermal water loss

message: The following external link was removed from the article after five years of service in June 2013.
*http://www.tewl.wikia.com -a Wiki with original research and technical detail on TransEpidermal Water Loss. -It is still active. 2.98.221.246 (talk) 17:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link removal after five years
Talk:Necrobiosis lipoidica

message: This article was initially categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 23:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: It would seem that the description is only applicable to the light-skinned sufferers. Absurdist1968 (talk) 03:30, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clinical Appearance?
Talk:Alphos

message: It's pretty clear from the article and a search for sources that this is an old name for a disease or a syndrome, as there seem to be no sources more recent than the 19th century, but I don't know enough about the topic to ascertain what the current name is for this. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where should this redirect to?
Talk:DermAtlas

message: I re-wrote the whole thing 'cause it sounded like an advert to me (WP:ADS) and was repetitive.  Unclear to me is how the site is really edited-- I have the impression it is by panel (not exclusively JHU staff --as was stated).  DermAtlas looks like a good site... too bad it isn't GFDL. Nephron  T|C 14:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-write 
Template talk:Dermatology-stub

message: Hello, I come to report that, for some reason, this template isn’t properly showing in a related stub despite actually being inserted, specifically Autosomal dominant multiple pterygium syndrome - Wikipedia. Please investigate what could be happening. Alejandro Herrera Barboza (talk) 22:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template not showing properly in an article
Talk:Angiokeratoma

message: Hello to all! I am proposing a merge from the following articles into this article:
* Angiokeratoma of Mibelli
* Angiokeratoma of Fordyce
* Solitary angiokeratoma
* Fordyce's spot 
* Verrucous vascular malformation
This is for the following reasons:
* The main article would benefit significantly from having all this information in one place.
* These articles are very short in length (1-2 sentences) and have not been edited significantly in 3-4 years.
* This knowledge shouldn't be obscured from readers of this article by virtue of being isolated in an obscure article of 1-2 lines.
* These topics may receive more attention by being mentioned in the main article.
* The articles, if needs be, could be re-expanded at a later date.
Kind Regards, LT90001 (talk) 05:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment - not sure about merging pages about vascular structures (angiokeratomas angiokeratomata?) with pages about sebaceous structures (Fordyce spots) is logical? But, I would support merging Oral Fordyce Granules with Fordyce's spot, since they are the same entity as far as I am aware... Could be argued to merge the angiokeratoma pages together, but would keep Fordyce pages separate from them. Lesion (talk) 11:02, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have completed the merge, retaining a separate Fordyce spot article. LT90001 (talk) 01:03, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  were you still looking to merge anything here, or are you happy? Lesion (talk) 18:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello! Thanks. I'm happy and considering merging these. What would be your opinion of a merge of just four or three of the ones here? --LT910001 (talk) 04:58, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I merged oral fordyce spot with fordyce spot in the end. Regarding other merges, I don't know much about angiokeratoma(ta), but it seems perfectly reasonable to merge everything with that term in the name into one article? Lesion (talk) 12:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge
Talk:Phenoxyethanol

message: "The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) data sheets show chromosomal changes and genetic mutation effects in testing as well as testicular atrophy and interference with reproductivity in mice for other glycol ethers, although phenoxyethanol is not mentioned in the abstract." (emphasis added)
If the source doesn't mention the topic, what is the point of bringing it up at all? Huw Powell (talk) 01:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this even be in the "Safety" section? 

message: To add to article: what is it made from? 173.89.236.187 (talk) 04:42, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  To add to article
Talk:Sugaree

message: This page spends a lot of time talking about other songs with similar names, some of which are notable in their own right. Here I’m thinking of Elizabeth Cotten’s “Shake Sugaree” in particular. Since this page is about “Sugaree” by the Grateful Dead,  shouldn’t these other songs, which aren’t necessarily related except via the uncommon expression “shake sugaree,” have their own pages?
magnificat (talk) 00:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Related songs

message: And what about this "sugaree" of 1957 ?  
 THE JORDANAIRES "Sugaree" Deutsche CAPITOL 1957, The Jordanaires
Other version of 1959 : 
 Rusty York - Sugaree
--AXRL (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sugaree of 1957 ?
Talk:Acne fulminans

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM. kilbad (talk) 03:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: There's a statement that sleeping on one's side can cause shoulder dislocation. It's marked as citation needed, and for what it's worth, doesn't pass my smell test. I'm also unable to find any supporting evidence on Wikipedia. I'm removing it, feel free to reinstate it if citations are found.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msaunier (talk • contribs) 04:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sleeping on side
Talk:Acne cosmetica

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM. kilbad (talk) 03:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 
Talk:Aqueous cream

message: Wouldn't like to add this section myself, for fear of doing it wrong, but a lot of doctors in the UK prescribe aqeous cream as a moisturiser, and it is not meant to be left on as a moisturiser, as it can damage skin.
So, maybe add a warning, or a section or something to tell people.
Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1315728/How-gentle-skin-creams-baby-eczema.html
87.102.9.210 (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

message: It has been remove it from the NICE guideline on the management of eczema in 2007 and is no longer advised for use in radiotherapy.. so apparently nothing is left from the indications.  It might be used for washing as originally intended? Richiez (talk) 21:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indications
Talk:Allen Brain Atlas

message: For the most part, this article is clear and gives good general information regarding the Allen Brain Atlas. However, if possible, include more information as to how the various brain atlases were/are created. For example, what experimental procedures were followed or what techniques were used to come up with the scientific data incorporated in each atlas. One or two techniques are mentioned like the in situ hybridization, however, more would be better. There is also no mention of any researchers contributing to the data of the atlases. If possible, their names and the specifics of their research should be included. The names of any organizations, labs, or researchers who use the atlas data, should also be included. Also, grammatical errors and sentence structure needs a little work, for example wordiness. Word repetitiveness should also be addressed. It would also be nice to link your article with other pages using double brackets. This will allow the readers to be better informed of the concepts being discussed and increase the general quality of the article.Beardser (talk) 02:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Adding captions to the two brain scanning images, just to describe what's going on and how it relates to the database, would be helpful. But pictures look great and with a little info, would definitely add to the article!
Leslieg317537 (talk) 12:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. What ideas do you have for how the pictures could be captioned? I also wonder if the pictures are properly attributed according to WP:SCREENSHOT.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captions for pictures 

message: The content looks really good, but the writing can get a bit wordy, like said above. I saw it mostly in the Research Techniques and Contributions to Neuroscience sections. More information on the contributions to neuroscience could be included, such as specific experiments or results that have helped the field so far. And don't forget to link terms to other pages (stopped about halfway through). 
Leslieg317537 (talk) 14:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content
Talk:Structural inheritance

message: Is "digital" the word geneticists use to describe the information found in DNA sequences?130.86.14.87 (talk) 05:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "DIGITAL information such as is found in DNA sequences"

message: * Support – The subject matter (but obviously not the content) of cortical Inheritance and this article are essential identical.  The subject matter would be better covered in one article as opposed to two fragmented articles.  Boghog (talk) 19:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Human Genome Organisation

message: The article mentions 1988 as the founding year; the table of content on the top right states 1989.
Could we add more links to verify this, and clear up this inconsistency please? I actually visited wikipedia
just now to confirm that my local dataset is correct. 2A02:8388:1641:8380:3AD5:47FF:FE18:CC7F (talk) 00:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History is confusing
Talk:Genome@home

message: It would be nice to see what benefits, if any, have been derived from the results.Ykral (talk) 06:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Anyone know where they went?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.14.106 (talk) 21:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is a link to the results?
Talk:Odd Man Out (American TV series)

message: Hey everyone. I reworked the main paragraph describing the series - it was a tad awkward. I also added the piece of trivia pertaning to Brandon Routh. SkittlzAnKomboz 03:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Genetic variability

message: Consider merging this article with genetic diversity since the concepts are very close and it's not always clear when to link to the diversity or variability page. Proposed name for the merged page: genetic variation. – SteveChervitzTrutane (talk) 09:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[Genetic diversity]]

message: The sentence 
"It is defined as "the formation of individuals differing in genotype, or the presence of genotypically different individuals, in contrast to environmentally induced differences which, as a rule, cause only temporary, nonheritable changes of the phenotype"." 
is incorrect, and I believe will give readers the wrong impression. The error lies in "...as a rule, cause ONLY TEMPORARY...". If you cut your hand off, it is permanent, yet now you only have one hand. The variability of the number of hands humans have is very low, but it is not zero due to environmental factors. 
The above is a simple example. On a more detailed level, the fetal environment has a significant impact on the offspring's development, as does the environment after birth during early development. Sometimes the effects of the fetal environment even cause changes in the genes of the offspring (like in the case of Dutch hunger winter babies for example). I think the sentence at the beginning of the article falsely understates the importance of environment on phenotype. Marley maldon (talk) 18:59, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested edit 

message: — Assignment last updated by Ebbenw (talk) 15:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Science Writing
Talk:Club Kids

message: There were several groups of young "club kids" who were encouraged by managers to come to the clubs and spread the word.  There were quite a number at Danceteria known as "Rudolph's club kids" - always let in ahead of the lines, never paid a cover and received comlementary drink tickets or just didn't get charged by the bartenders.  Michael Alig and the regulars at Limelight (just 'round the corner) were seen by some as poseurs, late comers and no longer part of the avant garde / underground music movement.
Vonwotan 23:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Club Kids" was a term that actually started in the early eighties 

message: The external links shouldn't be removed, as they were recently; they're quite relevant to the article. 
(By the way, I just stumbled here from Special:RecentChangesLinked/New York City Subway, so I don't know much about the topic, so someone please correct me if need be.) Epicgenius (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: WP policy on external links doesn't say we include a bunch of links merely because they exist and are relevant to the article subject.  Just the opposite in fact. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)  (talk)  (contribs) 16:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But WP:ELYES does say that relevant links should be included. Epicgenius (talk) 17:35, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no justification under WP:ELNO for removing a least one of these links. BMK (talk) 19:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links
Talk:Anterior fontanelle

message: Hello, I have in my nursing curriculum books that say between 12 months and 18 months for the anterior fontanelles. I've changed the article to reflect that. (Ironically, there are professors on my community college campus that state that a professor edited a wikipedia page to reflect inaccurate information, and that information is still there. I think I found it, here. The anterior fontanelles DO NOT close between the ages of 25-50. Shenanigans. I've looked through 3 different books, and they all say between a year and year and a half. 
I don't know how to cite, properly, within Wikipedia, but the source I'm using was this one: http://www.aafp.org/afp/2003/0615/p2547.html ; trying to go with scientific literature. :) Greengirl11 (talk) 14:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Talk:Ancestry-informative marker

message: where does the "35 million SNP sites" figure come from? Where does the "collection of 3011 highly distinctive SNP sites" come from? Such claims are completely worthless, and even harmful, if they cannot be traced to some source. WP:CITE is policy, can you please stick to it. --dab (𒁳) 10:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled