Talk:Buruli ulcer

message: Some thoughts while skimming, feel free to disagree with my nitpicking... 
*What's the rationale for citations in the lead? Some things are cited and some are not; some of the things that are cited don't seem to be controversial or to fall under any of the categories at WP:When to cite, e.g. "Buruli ulcer is an infectious disease characterized by the development of painless open wounds"...  
* - systemic immunosuppression or only at the site of the ulcer? 
* - are you saying "mostly in ... rural Australia" or "mostly in... Australia"? 
* I find this phrasing a bit awkward. 
* - I would think that a group at Melbourne University would be Australian by definition  
More to come... Spicy (talk) 02:44, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Nitpickery is exactly what I'm looking for (though if you see large glaring issues, I'm happy to hear that too)! Thank you very much for the quick response! Will get to these ASAP. Halloween seems like a great day to think about mysterious gaping wounds that will not heal. Ajpolino (talk) 18:11, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Random thoughts from Spicy

message: * As noted by Spicy, I would feel OK with removing the first two citations from the lead, but I like to cite hard data (the 3,000 to 5,000), because then we can easily check in the future if those numbers need updating, by mousing over the citation date.
* Personal preference, your choice, but to my brain, parenthetical inserts cause me to read over the contents as if they are less important.  And when reading there are three categories, I want to see first those three categories in each sentence.  I have been accused of having a very linear brain, so ignore me as you wish, but I would do this:
** A single small (less than five centimeters) ulcer is category I. Larger ulcers (up to 15 centimeters) are category II. Ulcers that are larger, disseminated across the body, or include particularly sensitive sites (such as the eyes, bones, joints, or genitals) are called category III. -->
*** Category I describes a single small ulcer that is less than . Category II describes ulcers that are larger and can be up to .  Category III is for ulcers that are larger, disseminated across the body, or include particularly sensitive sites such as the eyes, bones, joints, or genitals. Should there be an "even" before the larger on Cat III ... that is are they larger than 15 cm?  Take note also of need to convert ... whereever centimetres are first used is where we should use abbr=off, the rest can be on.  
* I would put a parenthetical after cytosol (the liquid found inside cells). I would also do the same for endoplasmic reticulum if I could find a short way to describe that, but not sure that can be done, if so, the wikilink will have to do. Could we put something after neutrophils like (parts of white blood cells)? 
* Is it possible to avoid using the word large twice in same sentence?  For example,
** This results in large-scale tissue death at the site of infection, causing the large open ulcer characteristic of disease.
*** This results in considerable tissue death at the site of infection, causing the large open ulcer characteristic of disease. 
* This leaves me wondering how often it happens and what were the circumstances ... I am imagining an extreme lack of hygiene.
** Human-to-human transmission is extremely rare, 
***Extreme indeed, though perhaps not in the way you're imagining. The only recorded case of human-to-human transmission was in 2003 from a human bite (not as wild a story as it sounds at first blush. Both the biter and bitee were children playing, paper). Due to this one reported case, some authors call human-to-human transmission very rare. Others dispense with the qualification. The two (in my opinion) finest recent reviews on the topic for example state  , and  . Now that I'm looking back at those two reviews, I've half a mind to switch to their wording... Thoughts? Ajpolino (talk) 00:33, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: * I do remember that post, but cannot find it where I expected to ... perhaps ... https://webaim.org/techniques/alttext/ SandyGeorgia (Talk)  01:31, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-FAC notes from SandyGeorgia

message: this article is getting very close to FAC ready; when you have time, could I interest you in reviewing the images?  Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk)  18:14, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The images are all appropriately licensed. However, I am concerned about the accessibility of File:Buruli_ulcer_cases_2018.svg - it's difficult to distinguish which country is meant to be what shade. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:28, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ajpolino, I think this can be addressed by simply adding the country names for each color grouping to the caption ... that allows visually impaired to get the information without seeing the colors.  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  22:20, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:   Forgive me, I don't have a good eye for this kind of thing. Is this color scheme any better? Either way, I can add the country names to the caption as well (or to the alt-text? That would be unusually long alt-text; so, perhaps the caption is best after all?). Ajpolino (talk) 01:21, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: that's definitely better than it was, but I would suggest adding the data in the caption as well. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for taking the time to look through the images! Ajpolino (talk) 02:21, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 2

message: Hi all, thank you for the comments. I think I've addressed everything above? If there's something you're still waiting for me to respond to, or you wanted to follow-up on something, please let me know. Otherwise, I can try reaching out to a few others to get their opinions? I'm in no big rush here. Thanks again! Ajpolino (talk) 20:28, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: what would you think of me now calling in a non-medical FA regular and asking only for a brief, is it lay-reader-friendly-only review?  Once that is done, I think you're ready ... we have overthought this one to death :) SandyGeorgia (Talk)  21:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  That would be great! Thank you. Ajpolino (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done ... and a reminder to you of all of the notes I gave Spicy for when you approach FAC.  No "done" checkmarks.  I know there's no chance of you being combative with reviewers :0  And remember that it is very hard to entice reviewers, so keep responses as brief as possible to avoid overwhelming the FAC, and be sure to put up a catchy introductory blurb that will entice others to read ... mention that you've had medical and non-medical review, as well as image review.  As soon as you post the FAC, I will mention that I've checked that the sources are MEDRS-compliant, but have not done a copyvio check (and will make a joke that it's not needed since you work at CCI :)  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  22:11, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-arbitrary break for reading ease

message: Okay, so these are liable to be a bit rough on the medical side, so please bear with me. I don't believe I've ever collaborated on a review with you before, so I'll go ahead and give a disclaimer that I tend to throw a lot of stuff out with an eye for discussion about smaller points, not that I'm trying to nitpick something to death.
* "The World Health Organization receives between 3,000 and 5,000 reports of Buruli ulcer each year" - This to me almost asks for an "As of, ..." here
** Hmmm the reference I cite is published in 2019 () and itself cites a 2018 review that reprints the WHO data since 2002 (going back in time from 2018 to 2002, the annual case numbers are 2708, 2217, 1952, 2043, 2242, 2627, 3213, 4006, 4906, 5082, 5148, 5033, 5376, 4746, 4937, 3346, and 3245). So to say "As of 2019... 3,000 to 5,000... each year" doesn't seem quite right since I think the review author was trying to give some stable range that totals tend to fall within (though of course we can see some of the values fall outside that range). We could say "In 2018, the World Health Organization received 2708 reports of Buruli ulcer". Or be more explicit in mentioning that total report numbers vary but tend to be between 3,000 and 5,000. Or add a "typically" between "Organization and receives". Does one of those (or a different) options strike you as most accurate and interesting to read? Ajpolino (talk) 04:43, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for taking the time to read through. If you don't mind, I'll reply inline to your points above. If that seems messy for you, let me know and I'll happily refactor things back out. Ajpolino (talk) 04:22, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Gave a first response to each. Happy to hear your further thoughts on any. Thank you again for taking the time. As an aside, I was thrilled to see your recent updates to Battle of Pilot Knob and Fort Davidson. My +1 and I were finally going to see Taum Sauk a few weeks ago and had to pull over in Pilot Knob when the dog lost his breakfast in the back seat. The park is quite nice. A lovely walk, a sobering monument, and a public trash can for disposing of dog vomit. Next trip I'll reach out to see if we can take any useful pictures for you. Ajpolino (talk) 05:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, so I really like the changes made.  Personally, I'd support this at an FAC, but I also know little about the subject matter, and my vote probably wouldn't be weighted too heavily at FAC.  As to Fort Davidson, I rewrote a good chunk of that late at night while quarantined, so the GAN has flagged an embarrassing number of issues. Hog Farm  Bacon 17:05, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hog Farm , part of my devious plot to haul you in here where I usually call on Ceoil is to show more editors that they need not be scared off of reviewing medical FACs ... it wasn’t that bad after all ;) Thank you ever so much!  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  17:09, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you Hog Farm. Your comments are much appreciated, and an outsider's view is always immensely valuable. Ajpolino (talk) 17:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: A layman's look

message: As this article has been promoted to FA (congratulations Ajpolino!) I've created the editnotice at Template:Editnotices/Page/Buruli ulcer. Spicy (talk) 07:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean I woke up in the middle of the night for nothing? . Thanks, Spicy, and congratulations to Ajpolino and all who helped!  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  07:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I didn't know that page existed until now, so rest assured your work is not in vain... :p Spicy (talk) 08:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you both for your commentary and guidance. The article wouldn't have made it across the FAC line without you both. Here's to many more overhauled articles and trips to FAC. Cheers! Ajpolino (talk) 08:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editnotice