Talk:Arachnoiditis

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Arachnoiditis.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Major edit

I took out the ridiculous clinical trial paragraph. I have no idea why that has been in there for so long. Then again, this article had a section titled "Prognathisism" instead of "Prognosis." -- Cyborg Ninja 08:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basically copied it. Not good.

Just a note to say that this article is based upon the public domain material available at: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/arachnoiditis/arachnoiditis.htm. David Johnson [T|C] 15:45, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Removed external link

Removed the external link to the Arachnoid Activist website as it deals with arachnoid cysts and not Arachnoiditis as well it has it's own page on the Wiki. Nothing against arachnoid cysts but don't want people getting confused with two different conditions.

Poorly written article

Too many flaws. Tried correcting some of them. Very poorly article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pchang26 (talk • contribs) 01:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zero citations

There isn't a single citation within the entire article. Can we get someone conversant with the condition to fix the article?Wzrd1 (talk) 18:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead paragraph edit

I agree, this is a poor article, and I'm sorry I haven't had time to do the research to improve it further. I have just taken out some of the more emotive material in the lead paragraph, as well as a couple of repetitions and a reference to a dog study, and reworded the first sentence. Neurotip (talk) 17:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: WikiMed Fall 2023

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 October 2023 and 17 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Swk152419 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Swk152419 (talk) 20:47, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plan for editing page

Hi all, I am planning to edit this page. I am going to bring more sources to it and am currently conducting a literature search on it. I will then bolster the work you have all done a tremendous job with already and add relevant sentences to the sections in a way that is better for the lay person in medicine to understand while also being comprehensive from a medical standpoint. Swk152419 (talk) 14:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback for the changes that you made can be found below. Excellent work!

Lead

The lead includes an introductory sentence which makes it very easy to understand what arachnoiditis is in simple terms. I have noticed that the introduction was simplified from its original form which makes it much more readable.

Organization

The article is much better organized after the changes that you have made. There are more sections that are divided into less wordy segments which makes it very readable. I think breaking it down by background, etiology, pathogenesis, and signs and symptoms is the perfect way to approach this article in a readable manner. The etiologies are clearly listed without extra words that could add confusion. Excellent work!

Tone and Balance

The tone of the content is very neutral. The words are understandable and not overly complex. My only recommendation would be to remove the term "extremely" as a more professional word can be utilized.

Sources and References

Most of the content that is added is up to date, there are a few older articles from 2001. I recognize that many of these articles are older because the main contribution in this space might have been written years ago. However, if there is newer literature available, I recommend updating it if possible. The sources come from reviews and secondary literature and are very strong articles. Many articles were added which adds to the strength of the content.

Overall Feedback

The organization of the article is excellent, . Overall, I would say that the content that is added is excellent and has greatly contributed to the article. I believe these edits make a compelling argument to upgrade this article from start class. Great work! Mattm824 (talk) 20:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your time and consideration and I have integrated this feedback into the current draft and will be moving over my edits from sandbox to the move page. Thanks! Swk152419 (talk) 21:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you completed your November 2023 editing? There has been little to no updating done to this content, which is seriously out of date. AND there is no mention of Dr. Forrest Tennent at all. He is the leader in AA treatment. 71.89.157.194 (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]