User talk:Doooosa/sandbox

Dr. Weiner

Edit in the original material. Don't add a new thing below it. Incorporate the material that is already there! What was present was most of an abstract already! Don't reinvent it.

Link HEAVILY to other wikipedia pages. The first time you use a term, it should be linked.
Every piece of information needs a citation. If you took all the info in a paragraph from one place you can just cite at the end of the paragraph, but nothing longer than a paragraph should be uncited.
Abstract is missing history information.
Abstract should not have a header. It's just the part at the top.
Good use of accessible language.
If we think inheritance is autosomal dominant, that means we know something about the genes involved! Find that and include it!
"After tori removal, the dental surgeon or dentist will then give the patient post-op management or advise to ensure recovery is as painless as possible and effective. The dentist will prescribe pain medication to be taken every 6-8 hours with food; the patient will also be advised you on oral hygiene related to post-op care to decrease bacteria within the mouth while the area heals, such as: hydrating to avoid dry mouth, avoid using straws or creating any suction with the mouth, avoid smoking for at least one week after the surgery, and eating a light diet for the first 2 days (such as soup, yogurts, etc.), and getting sufficient rest and icing the area." This level of post-surgical management is not appropriate for a research article. This reads more like patient advice.
Eskimo is not an appropriate word. This is considered a slur.
There is recent research on this topic and you must include it. If you need help finding research, come talk to me. Nothing you put in that section is part of that section.
Sources need to be cited using wikipedia's citation manager.

Sweiner02 (talk) 01:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perla Solis

• I would recommend for you to add the orignal article into your article just because it looks like it is out of place and you might be able to even use the picture.

• I would recommend that for the causes you can go a little bit more in-depth or make it into sentences.

•Don't forget that for words you believe others might not know the meaning you add a link to it. An example would be hard palate and mandibular torus.

•I also recommend adding pictures such as loose teeth and gum inflammation

•Good job with the language where anyone is able to read it and understand what is going on. Overall good work but you care missing information. Perlaawikiarticle (talk) 05:29, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brett Stogsdill

I suggest adding a history of oral torus.

Terms should be linked to other wikipedia pages, if possible. Doesn't look like there is any links being used.

Sources don't look to be cited right now. Cite the sources you have at the bottom to the relevant information.

The signs & symptoms page is very good and like how tis broken out from painless to painful.

Add some pictures throughout to demonstrate the specific info conveyed.

Good job on the rough draft! Bsrt1995 (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bharat Kumar Anantaneni

• Oral tori are thoroughly explained in the text, along with their types (mandibular torus, buccal exostoses, and torus palatinus) and related symptoms.

• It is easier to follow when the information is broken up into clearly defined sections, such as Abstract, Signs & Symptoms, Causes, Pathophysiology, etc.

• A thorough grasp of the clinical and procedural facets of oral tori therapy is evident in the explanation of surgical procedures and diagnostic techniques.

• A scientific foundation for comprehending the development of oral tori is provided by the examination of genetic variables, environmental impacts, and bone density.

• The story is enhanced by highlighting frequency across demographics and identifying research gaps (such as a lack of drugs or clinical trials).

• Some readers may become overwhelmed by the text's excessive detail. Readability may be enhanced by condensing some sections, particularly when restating important points (e.g., benign nature, lack of medicine).

• For readers without a medical background, several medical terms, including "palpitations" (probably meant to be "palpations") and "exostosis," may need to be briefly explained.

• Incorporating case studies or graphics would improve comprehension of oral tori and provide the content more relatable context.

• The treatment section might be more thorough if it included more information on how to handle issues like infection or bleeding, even though they are mentioned.

• Giving clinical or anecdotal examples could aid in demonstrating the condition's management and impact in the real world.

• The diagnostic part might be improved by briefly going over diseases like cysts and tumors that can resemble oral tori.

• It would be more thorough to discuss how oral tori, even in minor occurrences, might impact symptomatic individuals' day-to-day lives. Bharat kumar ANANTANENI (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anjali Dindi

*Nice breakdown of symptoms for cases not requiring treatment vs those that do.

*I think Research section needs some work. It could include 2-3 recent research articles or clinical trials. Currently, it mostly states what isn't being researched rather than current research directions.

*Overall I think it is well-written and easy to understand for general audience. You could add more links since we are adding this to Wikipedia. The section headers are helpful, but adding images or info-boxes would make the it more visually appealing and easier to read. 192.175.17.20 (talk) 23:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]