Factual accuracy::Adult-onset immunodeficiency syndrome


Wakari::august    Fentener::article    Disease::about    Started::descent    Context::study    Think::articles

Factual accuracy Please share your thoughts if you dispute the factual accuracy of the article here. Thanks. Wakari07 (talk) 21:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

My main question is on the name itself. AIDS 2.0 is a neologism that is not widely used in scholarly medical articles.--Dwaipayan (talk) 03:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
That question is already answered in the above paragraph: the name is random anyway, so it doesn't matter at this point. Wakari07 (talk) 03:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Any thoughts on how to fill the disambiguation links? They are intentional: for me, context (genetic/environmental, civilian/military, material/energetic, frequency/amplitude, temporal/causal, intentional/non-intentional) issues are not clear yet - i thought providing the disambiguation links for now is still better than no context at all. Wakari07 (talk) 15:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Adult-onset immunodeficiency syndrome sections
Intro   Name of the article    Factual accuracy    why is this a military stub?    Crap    First diagnose    Genotype    Primary or not immunodeficiency    An \"elevated\" or a \"more frequent\" IFN-\u03b3 production in patients?    Concept cloud   

Factual accuracy
PREVIOUS: IntroNEXT: Name of the article