Talk:Amaurosis fugax

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine / Cardiology / Neurology / Ophthalmology (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Cardiology task force (marked as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Neurology task force (marked as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Ophthalmology task force.
 

ps. Fugax is definitely Latin; amaurosis is Greek imported into Latin.

This article needs some serious revision! Amaurosis fugax is painless, monocular loss of vision, which may be total or sectorial. Therefore, general hypotension and positive acceleration should not be included as causes because these things would cause binocular loss of vision. I am going to remove them, and also reorganize the content. Also, please expect many more in-text citations over the next few days. Thank you for your patience! Kilbad 20:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I have since added much more content and citations. However, this article is still extremely inadequate/incomplete. I will continue to work on it in the coming days. Kilbad 20:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Peer reviewlet[edit]

Kilbad (talk · contribs) left a message on Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Assessment requesting a peer review. I direct the reader to a previous peer review by Colin (talk · contribs) on this page. Many of Colin's comments are still applicable. For instance, WP:MEDMOS should be applied to this article with regards to the section headers. The MOS in general could be applied with regards to bullet points. I also note that the numerous references are not formatted with {{cite journal}}. The references in general are mostly primary sources - the average reader will not benefit at all from knowing that once in the history of mankind someone found PAN as a cause for amaurosis fugax. Hope this helps. I'm happy to assist in case of any further issues. JFW | T@lk 22:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)