Talk:Chronic diarrhea of infancy

[diarrhea in infancy] has a brief outline of the condition, but there is no cause associated with it. The differential diagnoses section can be improved by including how to differentiate between conditions. I will readily discuss my editing ideas with others working on this article to ensure everyone is on the same page prior to publishing any changes.A.M. Tatarian (talk) 20:55, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

The previous reference associated with 2 was linked to a wrong article, changed it to the correct article https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/pediatrics/symptoms-in-infants-and-children/diarrhea-in-children?query=diarrhea%20in%20childrenA.M. Tatarian (talk) 20:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 June 2020 and 21 August 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sshen18, K10vea, A.M. Tatarian, Jarango22. Peer reviewers: J.Orta UCSF.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Foundations II 2020 Group 10 Proposed Edits

This article lacks a lot of detail. The goal for me would be to add more information so readers have enough information to have a general idea what this condition is and good references to refer to if they would like more detail.

Like the previous editor mentioned, a cause section would be a good addition. I would also be interested in adding more pictures, especially in the treatments section so readers can have a visual and familiarize themselves with common treatments.

According to the tutorials we have watched, an ideal source is no more than 5 years old and I have noticed most of our references are more than 5 years old. Another goal is to find more recent sources. Sshen18 (talk) 21:31, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The treatment section is vague and misleading when it comes to rehydration therapy. Expansion on the topic with specific details regarding why OTC meds are not recommended as well as clarification on diet and rehydration will improve this section.A.M. Tatarian (talk) 21:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Group 10, welcome to Wikipedia! Just a note to help guide your thinking and research, we often try to include the sections listed here for articles on diseases/syndromes. For an article that needs tons of info like this one does, I often find the list helpful to organize my efforts. I'll try to keep an eye on this page, so if you have any questions as you get to editing, feel free to ask here. Otherwise, happy editing. Ajpolino (talk) 22:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Group 10 will now focus on this article: Chronic diarrhea of infancy following the request that we only work on one article. Sshen18 (talk) 17:28, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Group 9 Peer Review

RShah33 (talk) 20:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Group 10!

I was reviewing your article to answer the following question: "Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? If not, specify…" I found your draft to have a neutral view throughout each section of the Wiki. The only sentence that could be construed as having a bias was one written in the Treatment and Management section. The sentence begins: "[w]ith these considerations, all children should consume a normal balanced diet based on their age..." This can be construed as potentially bias and could possibly be reworded to something like "To avoid growth restriction and malnutrition, children should consume a normal diet," or "Growth restriction and malnutrition in children can be avoided through a balanced diet based on the child's age." I do recognize that this point is nit-picky (but there was a good, neutral tone throughout your whole draft, so it was the only small detail I could find).

I also noticed in the Cause section that there are a few grammatical errors pairing nutrients and is; for example, "when nutrients that is not absorbed..." These should be edited to match subject/verb agreement (i.e. the nutrients are).

Great work, all! Wrroth97 (talk) 20:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Great job group 10! Formatting of the article is looking good and so is the content! Nnobahar (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Great job with the citations and attributing your claims to mostly Secondary source literature. All the sources I saw were freely available to access so therefore good content! RShah33 (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)RShah33 (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey Group 10! I reviewed your article for plagiarism and copyright violation issues. Overall, I think you guys did a great job synthesizing the information and putting it in your own lay language as much as possible. There was only one section that I think could use some re-writing and that was the introduction/first paragraph. The wording in sentences 2-4 is very similar to what is written on the WHO website so if possible I would try to change those up.

Very minor grammar errors:

- In the Cause section, I noticed this sentence was missing the word "of", "...osmotic diarrhea which is a lack absorption.".

- In the Treatment and management section, the sentence currently reads "...the use of probiotics don't have an effect on the length of diarrhea in toddlers.". Should it say "doesn't" instead of "don't"?

J.Orta UCSF (talk) 21:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)