Jump to content

Talk:Cancer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 58.178.254.209 (talk) at 11:49, 14 November 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former good articleCancer was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 22, 2005Good article nomineeListed
February 1, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
April 28, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 21, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
December 18, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Delisted good article



Disease or condition?

The introductory sentence describes cancer as a disease. It is not contagious. Is it not a condition?

Can someone add this to the article?

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/new_study_finds_that_most_cancer_mutations_are_due_to_random_dna_copying_mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnDoe30001 (talkcontribs) 16:55, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:JohnDoe30001 Typically we stick with sources described at WP:MEDRS.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Free cancer charts, maps, stats

I suggest putting some of this at the top of the talk section so that it is not archived. It is near-useless once archived. Maybe create a banner for it.

Resources:

  • Cancer - Our World in Data. Many free charts and maps. At the bottom of every page on the site is this: "Our World in Data is a creative commons publication about human civilization at a global scale." CC link is to CC-BY-SA which is accepted by Wikipedia and the Commons.

The tabs below the images provide sources, chart data, SVG, and PNG downloads.

You may have to upload the charts and maps you want to the Commons of course:

Check these categories first to see if the images are already uploaded:

--Timeshifter (talk) 02:58, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{Commons category|Cancer statistics|position=left}}
I added this to the external links section. It does not make the page longer since the other stuff is on the right side. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering how to combine them. Someone else combined them. Can position the combined one to the left.
{{Commons category multi|Cancer|Cancer statistics|position=left}}
--Timeshifter (talk) 01:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that a space in front of the template prevented some weird problem with extra indentation being added to lines and section headers that followed here on the talk page. {{clear}} did not help. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:49, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unindent. {{Commons cats}} - easier to remember and use.
{{Commons cats|Cancer|Cancer statistics|position=left}}
--Timeshifter (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2nd article sourced

how exactly is linking to an article that MENTIONS its source as another article and dosent link to said article, a legitimate way of sourcing anything? especially considering said article itself is quite difficult, if at all possible, to actually find? not to mention the website links some of its sources yet chooses which ones to not actually source. so if these claims cannot be PROVEN, only cited to random examples that nobody can find, why are they here?67.246.187.128 (talk) 21:54, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what precisely your point is. Is this a general concern about WP:MEDRS? JFW | T@lk 08:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article Evaluation

Everything is relevant to the topic being discussed but could use some improvement in terms of the amount of information. In the first paragraph rather than stating, “While these symptoms may indicate cancer, they may have other causes” the writer should also specify which other causes they can have. Another section that needs improvement is the “Causes” section because it fails to elaborate on the given information. The overall tone of the article is neutral which helps eliminate any bias. Rnp2w (talk) 00:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)Rnp2w[reply]

Article Evaluation

The article did not go off topic and it seemed to cover a lot of different subjects about cancer. I also checked some of the article's sources and they seemed to be up to date and reliable. The article does need more detail though; many topics were covered, but they were broad. The article needs a little more detail about how cancer cells are produced and how they spread throughout the body. More statistics and facts would be helpful for a topic like cancer. It informs the audience how cancer can affect them and what the chances of survival are for different types and stages of cancer. Rachelv37 (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluate

I really enjoy this article and how it was laid out, it was very informal but not over whelming. This article gives you facts and also give pictures to help show what cancer looks like. I am a son that his mom had cancer, so I know a good amount about it too, unfortunately, but this article was a good read and I enjoyed it. It was not to harsh but it let you know the facts, whys, and what to expect. For someone that maybe has been diagnosed this might give them a general and better idea in what to expect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaaccc 11 (talkcontribs) 15:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]