Talk:Waterborne disease

message: What , it could just be included into the other tables as a separate column (so that instead of looking at an illness in one table and having to look it up in another, it would just be in the same table.  am adding the kingdom names to each section also since the heading "Parasitic" is misleading considering there are parasitic protozoa.Matt.leeck (talk) 13:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Allergic infection

message: I am making my current primary objective to be fixing this page and making a decent article out of what was a vague, questionable list. The work is still in progress, sorry for the inconvenience if any...Matt.leeck (talk) 03:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Under Construction

message: I had occasion to link to WBDisease, so I checked on the article, and frankly was dismayed. I don't think it has been well conceived. Needs full re-write. I don't mind having a go, but I am not a medic. If anyone is contemplating doing it properly, fine, but if not, is there a doctor in the house? I would prefer at least to bounce my outlines off someone competent before investing serious time. JonRichfield (talk) 14:54, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Errr... new here of course, but...

message: I have been working on sanitation-related Wikipedia articles for the last six months but have only come across this one now, after seeing a link in the template on pollution template:Pollution. This article could have great potential (very important topic), and I don't think it should be classified as "list" type, as it contains much more than just a listing? It should actually be linked to from a number of other pages, e.g. sanitation, fecal-oral route, open defecation. It would be good if someone with a medical background could look over this article to see if it is any good. What is your opinion about this article, Doc_James? What aspects of it should be improved and how? EvM-Susana (talk) 07:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed it now from a list article to a class C article, as I think it's more than a mere list. I also linked to it from these three pages: sanitation, fecal-oral route, open defecation. Thoughts anyone? Doc_James? EvM-Susana (talk) 08:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this really be classified as a "list" type article? Could have great potential

message: I am currently working on the section "health aspects" in the article on WASH. I am trying to get my head around how to link and match that article to this one so that we don't end up with too much overlap. Any suggestions? EMsmile (talk) 05:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: How to deal with overlapping content in other articles?

message: I am thinking about adding the perspective of how the economic stability of a community impacts how significant waterborne diseases are there.Sakura727 (talk) 23:36, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: New Addition to Socioeconomic impact section

message: I have restructured the article a bit to give it the standard headings that we use for disease articles. Remember the article started out as a pure "list" article. I think it's good that it got expanded but we need to link across to the main other articles, such as sanitation rather than writing up similar content here. EMsmile (talk) 09:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Restructuring done

message: This is not my principal area of expertise and I wonder whether somebody with better knowledge could add in the various flukes (schistosomiasis, liver fluke etc)into the parasitic worms section. They get a substantive mention in the lede but ought to be covered in more detail in the tables. Although the lede text suggests that skin contact is the major route of infection, there is plenty of evidence of transmission through contaminated drinking water, including upland stream water draining sheep pastures. Thanks  Velella  Velella Talk   14:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Content about the various flukes?

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: not moved. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Waterborne diseases →  – singular 2601:541:4580:8500:1828:B837:8DF8:6B3D (talk) 09:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I don't mind either way but I wouldn't move Neglected tropical diseases as it's always thought of in plural form, I would argue. It's a slightly artificial way of grouping a bunch of diseases into one category. I think it would be rare to see it used in the singular form. EMsmile (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 1 October 2022 

message: — Assignment last updated by Kyleechoate (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Epidemiology ENPH 450