![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
may not always be correctly identified -> may not always be correctly diagnosed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.241.144.250 ( talk • contribs) 13:37, December 23, 2011
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Pediatric acute-onset neuropsychiatric syndrome (PANS) is a syndrome in which children have abrupt, dramatic onset of Tourette's Syndrome, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), or anorexia nervosa coincident with the presence of two or more neuropsychiatric symptoms. It is believed that these children experience a rise in dopamine levels as a result of a of cross-reactive anti-neuronal antibodies triggered by streptococcal or mycoplasma infection. The cross-reaction is believed to cause such side effects as tics. [1]
Werelived ( talk) 02:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. See above.
elektrik
SHOOS (
talk)
05:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I have moved this statement, based on an old review, to the daughter article, Treatment of Tourette syndrome, where experimental treatments are covered in more detail than typical for a broad overview article. (Mentioning also that I was halfway through upgrading this article to newer sources when the issues at PANDAS and several family funerals took my attention; I plan to return to this upgrade effort in about two weeks. If I find newer, better or different info on nicotine in all of the recent reviews, I'll add that.) Also please note the citation style (manual) in this article (just copy citation directly out of PubMed rather than going through Diberri). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:06, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
> Genetic studies have shown that the overwhelming majority of cases of Tourette's are inherited, although the exact mode of inheritance is not yet known and no gene has been identified. If genetic studies have shown inheritance, it is impossible for no gene(s) or genetic regions to have been identified since, you know, ***that is necessary for a genetic study to show inheritance***. I'm just a lowly IP editor though and thus not worthy to dare even think of editing or tagging your oh so precious featured articles. I never realized that before. Oh well, so much for anon editors being equally welcome to contribute. On point: I cannot tag that self-apparently nonsensical statement for verification and clarification. Can one of you other editors do it please? Thanks. -- 146.115.89.11 ( talk) 07:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Throughout the history of genetics - the entire 20th century - most identifications of traits as 'genetic' - that is, inherited - have been done based on breeding studies, not gene isolation. In fact, it was impossible to identify genes until DNA technology made it possible. For instance, we knew that red hair was inherited long before any 'red hair gene' was identified. This is Biology 101 genetics the most elementary of knowledge, and there is no doubt about it. MarkinBoston ( talk) 19:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Michele Zappella has long described what he termed dysmaturational syndrome or early-onset GTS, where one has transient regressive autism with tics, followed by fully blown, mostly non-pure GTS. The syndrome is differentiated from Landau-Kleffner syndrome by normal EEG. Shouldn't this be noted somewhere in the GTS article? I wanted to add it but thought I better check first lest I've got it the wrong way, given that a featured article failed to include it while it's been around for so long. To be clear my suggestion doesn't necessarily entail hastily promoting Zappella's propositions concerning therapy or classification, in case that was the problem.--What's_the_big_deal?! 03:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arpose ( talk • contribs)
The edit that's been reverted did not refer to a "dysmaturational syndrome" or an "early-onset GTS"; let's please forget about that (sorry I brought it up). As for articles mentioning a relation between (regressive) autism and TS, could one start from here [2]? Again the cases are there. It's not a taxonomy I want added here but possibly useful facts. --What's_the_big_deal?! 09:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arpose ( talk • contribs)
I don't know how to better word the subject, my apologies. However, as someone who suffers from Tourette's and being in their 30s, I found the general consensus of the article to be somewhat odd. It sounded as if TS is something that only really happens to children and fades away as you get older. My lifetime of experience with it has actually seen it become steadily worse as I've gotten older - perhaps because life is more stressful these days with increased worry about bills and other problems. The point I'm trying to make is that the article seems rather misleading. Maybe I'm reading it the wrong way, it's been known to happen, but I can assure anyone that it is not something that "goes away". Likewise, the whole bit about "premonitory urge" is a bit confusing. If I do get urges, not that I've ever really noticed something before an increase in activity, they've never been related to the tics that occur. -- 68.6.234.179 ( talk) 05:13, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I also had an adult onset tic disorder. And there is evidence that this exists, but they do not want to call it tourettes, likely because there are only 13 reported cases in one study (and some of them were cocain users, of which I am not, I was actually a consultant to the FED, before being shot down with my tic disorder.). From the web site "Adult Onset Tic Disorders", "Adult onset tic disorders represent an underrecognised condition that is more common than generally appreciated or reported. The clinical characteristics of adults newly presenting to a movement disorder clinic with tic disorders are reviewed, analysed, and discussed in detail. Clinical evidence supports the concept that tic disorders in adults are part of a range that includes childhood onset tic disorders and Tourette's syndrome." (Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, June 2000, volume 68) 172.243.58.98 ( talk) 05:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand how to use these talk pages so I'm probably doing it wrong, but the main problem is this: The Tourette's page makes it sound as if Coprolalia only exists as possible symptom of Tourette's, which of course is not only false, but is an enormous society-wide misconception that Wikipedia needs to do its best to dispel rather than reinforce. The Coprolalia page does a very good job of making the full extent of the distinction clear, but unfortunately the Tourette's page fails at this (although not nearly as badly as, for example, popular film). Unfortunately, I am now at a complete loss as to how to fix this in a way that SandyGeorgia won't revert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitrode ( talk • contribs) 05:48, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I have twice removed your edits because a) the lead is a summary and should not introduce text not covered in the article; b) the article is an overview and some material is better covered in sub-articles, but more importantly; c) your addition is anecdotal, uncited original research. I removed an edit that added text to the lead that is better included at coprolalia and is UNDUE in the lead. I removed a second edit that replaced accurate info with inaccurate info; coprolalia is related to Tourette's, although not exclusively. For example, PMID 9115463 does not say what you seem to think it says (I have the full article).
Further, most symptoms of most conditions are ... well ... symptoms; many symptoms occur in many conditions. Fever does not occur exclusively with flu, but it is associated with flu, for example. Where on this page does something "make it sound like coprolalia only exists as a symptom of Tourette's"? A full discussion of any symptom of any condition is better included at that symptom's page (eg coprolalia). Additionally, although coprolalia occurs in some other conditions, it is highly associated with Tourette's; your additions extend beyond fact into anecdote, and are not backed by sources.
Perhaps if you can explain where you think this page is misleading about the relationship between coprolalia and TS, we can come to an agreement about how to fix it (if in fact there is a problem), but we can't fix something by a) adding WP:UNDUE or inaccurate text to the lead, or b) adding uncited anecdote. The article already explains that coprolalia is present in a very small minority of people with TS, and additional detail is given at coprolalia. It is unclear to me what you find wrong with the text, but if you could provide a medrs-compliant source that backs your preferred wording, we could adjust.
BTW, I am still extremely busy IRL and might not get back to this immediately ... please allow a few days if I fail to respond. Regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
"Further, most symptoms of most conditions are ... well ... symptoms; many symptoms occur in many conditions. Fever does not occur exclusively with flu, but it is associated with flu, for example[...]Additionally, although coprolalia occurs in some other conditions, it is highly associated with Tourette's"
This is the key part of the problem. Unlike with fever/flu, common public perception is that Tourette's *is* uncontrollable swearing - that each one exclusively implies the other.
You and I may both know perfectly well that Coprolalia is a symptom not exclusively associated with Tourette's, just like fever is not exclusive to the flu. And most people are intelligent enough to know that fever does not imply flu. But, there is very *little* public understanding that Coprolalia does *not* imply Tourette's and vice versa. The Coprolalia page does make this clear, but the Tourette's page fails to even mention at all that Tourette's is not inherently implied by uncontrollable swearing.
Admittedly (and thankfully) the Tourette's page *does* inform readers that Tourette's does not imply uncontrollable swearing, but it fails to inform people of the reverse (that uncontrollable swearing does not imply Tourette's). Considering the widespead "Tourette's == uncontrollable swearing" misconception, it is irresponsible to rely exclusively on the Coprolalia article to clarify this fact. 76.189.120.12 ( talk) 01:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, most often associated with the exclamation of obscene words or socially inappropriate and derogatory remarks (coprolalia), but this symptom is present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's.
Coprolalia (the spontaneous utterance of socially objectionable or taboo words or phrases) is the most publicized symptom of Tourette's, but it is not required for a diagnosis of Tourette's and only about 10% of Tourette's patients exhibit it.
What I have experienced from some movement disorder specialists, is that Step infections cause autoimmune nightmares? The argument concerning the retention of antigen from Strep is still very unknown. The research is evenly split as of my last check on the matter? Idiotsavantmoron ( talk) 17:04, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I have not been concerned about PANDAS as a cause or diagnosis of tic increase! I am more worried about the unique manifestations of myself as a 35 year old. I am intrigued about something I have lived with and felt get worse. I can't prove but understand how it might in my specific daily life? It feels like a electric current that bounces all around me that never completely "grounds out"? That may not make sense, but I feel it like a lightning bolt that will not ground. I have been a part of and started an adult's with TS support group. All of our ages and intensities are similar but so completely unique! I have seen the most powerful and strangely gifted adults in my life. We all are awesome! I thank Bruse Hologram and the TSA of Ohio, for helping me reach out, so I could meet such beautiful people! My problem is I live in a place that local church's preach Tourette's is the Devil. I am among a few adults that exhibit such a profound case. I will start learning Wikipedia. Any suggestions or comments are greatly appreciated! Excuse the typos and my stupid smart phone. Idiotsavantmoron ( talk) 19:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
This article was nominated for FA status in 2006. That's a long time ago. The standards were much different then, and it's been many years and the article has likely changed drastically since then. Should it be sent to FAR? I would like to see this article one day run on the main page, but I am not sure if it -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 20:34, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I have removed this incorrect edit to restore correct and correctly cited information. Please review WP:OWN, WP:WIAFA and WP:MEDRS. The edit I removed a) introduced a citation style change, and b) replaced a 2011 source with an outdated 2000 source, introducing incorrect information. TS is no longer considered rare, period. Please discuss changes when editing an FA, as this has occurred more than once from the same editor. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
\
Raihop, please review WP:OWN#Featured articles, and gain consensus for edits here on user talk (not at, for example, Doc James talk page). This is not even remotely a mainstream idea in TS research; if you can locate any secondary review mention of it, that would be welcome, but one descriptive case does not warrant addition. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Regarding additions to Tourette_syndrome#Society_and_culture, please review the following and discuss before adding mention of occurrences of TS in the media, in culture, or society:
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:09, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
With respect to this sentence "Extreme Tourette's in adulthood is a rarity, and Tourette's does not adversely affect intelligence or life expectancy."
Have was moved to the first paragraph "Tourette's does not adversely affect intelligence or life expectancy."
The other half was summed up by " but this symptom is present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's" IMO
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
After seven edit conflicts in less than half an hour, and losing multiple responses and explanations, I will quit trying until you are finished. I have already answered and lost my responses to four of your edits. In the future, please lay out your issues first on the talk page -- it will be faster and easier for both of us. Because I've lost multiple responses to you in edit conflict, and I will be busy for the rest of the day and tomorrow morning, I will check back in tomorrow afternoon and address your points one by one. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
OK, I typed up my responses in my sandbox to avoid edit conflicts.
Ideas on how to say this in simpler language? Is the term premonitory needed in the lead? Could we simply say "preceded by an urge"? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Rather than "Comorbid conditions (co-occurring diagnoses other than Tourette's)"
can we say
"Other conditions that commonly occur in people with Tourette's... seen in tertiary specialty clinics"
Not sure if this is needed in the lead "seen in tertiary specialty clinics". Associated conditions is simplier than comorbid conditions.
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
This "These other conditions often cause more impairment to the individual than the tics that are the hallmark of Tourette's; hence, it is important to correctly identify associated conditions and treat them"
is simpler as
"These other conditions often cause more impairment than the tics; hence, it is important to correctly identify associated conditions and treat them."
We already say in the first paragraph that tics are the prime characteristic of the disorder, IMO we do not need to repeat this in paragraph 3. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Doc, in this version, I have gotten most of the changes you suggest (exceptions below). I find this imposed order of the lead clumsy, choppy, and confusing, but I've done it. A lead this choppy would not/should not pass FAC, and I believe the story flowed better by not imposing upon it the same order as the article. With TS, there are just some things that need to be explained before others can be understood. Generally, two kinds of people seek info about TS: parents of newly diagnosed children who are frightened out of their minds because they believe it to be a rare and disabling condition, or people who have encountered extreme media portrayals. The lead no longer addresses what most people seeking info about TS want to know in the order they can most easily digest it. Nonetheless, it is done. I think we've dumbed some very common words, but ... whatever.
What I have not done is take out "wax and wane", because
I have also left in the word "comorbid", because like "premonitory", anyone coming to any article or discussion about Tourette's is going to inevitably and inescapably encounter those two words, so we might as well get them out there and define them.
Please let me know where we stand. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
I would rather leave the remaining terms because ... this is not Simple Wikipedia ... in any literature about TS, these are terms that will be encountered. I feel pretty strongly that we cannot characterize coprolalia as "speaking" because that's just not how it comes out. We have made some improvements, though :0 Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Although a few changes are improvements, I do not find this version to be an overall improvement on the FA version copyedited by Tony1 that passed FAC with an unprecedented (then, and still today) level of support. While some wording changes may be improvements, we have diluted accuracy, and only for the sake of simplicity at times verging on Simple Wikipedia. The biggest damage to the flow resulted from imposing an enforced order of items to conform with an arbitrary notion of how medical leads should be constructed -- the same for every article. By chopping up and removing the paragraph beginning with "Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, ... " IMO we have changed a narrative that had a logical flow, to a choppy lead that is unpleasing to read and doesn't answer the queries most people first encountering Tourette's are likely to have.
I raise this because I am a bit troubled that I watched the same thing happen to Colin's exemplary Ketogenic diet. Doc, please consider it is not always imperative that History come last, and removing the "once considered rare" to the end, only because it sounds like "History", has damaged the flow here. You've made some good suggestions, but this arbitrary order has damaged the overall flow.
I'm also wondering why, if these words were so hard to understand, that this lead stood for 10 years without any reader expressing that problem, in an article with substantial page views. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
I looked here after seeing mention of it on some user talk pages. I'm far from having made a careful study, but my gut reaction is to think that Sandy and Colin are making good points. I guess I can see how simpler language is easier to translate (not that I regard that as a primary objective, because I don't), but I would think that any language can be translated into another language if the translators are good enough at it (and in hypertext, any isolated incidence of a word or phrase that does not translate precisely can be readily clarified in the target language). I also do not think we are writing for readers who are non-fluent in English. I do believe that we should write for a general audience, rather than for specialists, but again, hypertext makes it easy to define unfamiliar terms. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 22:08, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
OK, I can live with this version. I've merged some sentences to eliminate the choppiness, moved things around a wee bit without changing Doc's preferred order, adjusted a few words, and worked in a bit of new text to make the new organization flow better. Comments? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
By the way, Doc's move of the significant names for TS to the infobox, and out of the lead, is not in agreement with MOS:BOLDTITLE (and FAs must conform to MOS). Don't much care, but the text in the infobox is barely legible, and those are "real" names of the condition depending on the country one lives in. I understand they were taken out of the lead to make it simpler, but then the stupid infobox needs to have a better font. (Have never wanted this infobox here anyway because it forces the article to knowingly link to sources that contain faulty info ... but we've had that discussion before.) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:44, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Edit on Wikidata --> Disease? TS is not a disease. The official ICD name for the condition isn't even listed there (Combined vocal and multiple motor tic disorder [de la Tourette]).
Medline entry: [8]
Why must we link to incorrect and useless information because an infobox has the field????
MESH entry: [9]
Gene reviews: [10]
OMIM [11]
Diseases database [12]
OK, featured articles are supposed to be comprehensive; this article is. And yet an infobox forces us to link to inaccurate and outdated information which adds NOTHING to the article. I have never wanted the infobox; I am removing the faulty sources. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Jyt, [13] point by point, above, explain why. Standard practice? Have you seen the arbcase? Why are we pointing our readers-- prominently at the top of the infobox-- to known inaccuracies and outdated information? What purpose does this serve? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:12, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I do not think any of them must be kept. Medline plus is not the best source but easy to understand.
I've run out of steam for the day ... could you look at the epidemiology post above so we can finalize that point, if you concur? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:54, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Discussion continued at Talk:Tourette_syndrome#Splitting_the_infobox. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:29, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
from discussion at WT:MED....
Now that I know why Doc James did this ...
If I regain interest after this experience, I will at my leisure, step back through and make the necessary fixes. I can retain some of the necessary wording changes, while restoring the essentials as mentioned by Colin. If I care anymore. At least now the article is not inaccurate as Doc's first version was -- it is only dumbed down and awkward. Since I spend limited time on Wikipedia these days, I am unsure when or if I will attempt this.
Doc, I am glad to finally understand why you did this, because I found it to be a most bewildering encounter with you, not understanding why you barged in here after ten years and unilaterally rewrote the lead. So my suggestions to you are:
For now I have other things to work on. I wrote about 70% of this article (some as IPs before I registered an account). I see it has been copied almost verbatim on multiple translations, including several featured. If the correct attribution was not done on those translations, I have a copyright/attribution concern. Personally. I hope it is not a legal threat to say that I intend to investigate how the matter of correct attribution works on interwiki translation. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:32, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl appears to be barely active; this is what I have found:
which is pretty useless, because I would need to find the templates on the other-language Wiki. Would it be more expedient to send a DMCA takedown notice to the Wiki Foundation for every other language TS article, and let them sort their mess? Does a takedown notice by a Wikipedian breach No Legal Threats? IF so, how am I to locate all of these templates in all of these languages? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I will focus on the Italian and Spanish articles, since I do speak those languages and can determine if there is a problem with lack of attribution on content I wrote, and if that lack of attribution results in a take-down per DMCA.
Please don't email me on this, because I long ago lost my passwords and need to work on restoring my email account. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
An editor who admits knowing nothing of the topic brings the article to Featured level on another Wiki. This is a problem with translations that has long concerned me, and should concern all of us-- no one who isn't immersed in the topic and the sources should be translating. Still looking for attribution of content I wrote on no.wikipedia. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
My suggestion as a warning to readers about possible problems introduced by translators who do not know the topic is that there should be a template on the article, or at least on the talk page. Is anyone familiar with the topic maintaining the five-year-old Norway version to Featured standards? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
It gives the revision number which is nice "Revision as of 22:29, 5 December 2010 by Runareggen (talk | contribs) (Translated from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome (revision: 392451580) using http://translate.google.com/toolkit with about 49% human translations.)" Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 20:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Done added tag
[20]
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
03:03, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The Italian featured article has a talk page template on translation: "Questa voce contiene una traduzione, completa o parziale, della voce originale: Tourette syndrome» tratta da en.wikipedia.org. Consulta la cronologia della pagina originale per conoscere l'elenco degli autori." [21] I suggest a link to the version copied so readers will know how out of date and corrupted the translation becomes.
The template was added 28 Sept 2016. [22] We are left to guess which edits were translated, but looking at contributions on 9 Sept from the same editor who added the template, we still can't tell. Does this satisfy our attribution requirement?
More significantly, the Italians also have a medical warning to readers at the top, as does the Norway version, at the bottom. In addition to the numerous problems with medical content on Wikipedia, we now have translation issues as well. Perhaps my efforts will be better spent on renewing the effort to get a reader warning on Wikipedia's English content. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:23, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, the Spanish article is crap, but here we have significant portions copied verbatim without attribution. [23] That content was authored mostly by Tony1, Colin, Eubulides, Fvasconcellos and me. In previous edit, [24], a template was added that does not seem to satisfy our enduring requirement for attribution in either edit summary, or less desirably, on talk page. The template doesn't cover which text was added in multiple subsequent edits. Then Evasive removes the translation template, and I find none on talk, so there is no record of attribution of specific text. Evasivo is awarded on talk by Doc James as top medical editor, so I suspect we are seeing a classic example on the Spanish Wikipedia of what is going on elsewhere. (Nice translation, Evasivo, and I notice you didn't seem to have any problem with the words Doc James found difficult.) I would like the attribution to this article to be corrected, or the text taken down. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
The lead of the Portuguese TS article is also a translation from en.wiki. [25] No template on the article, no template on talk, so I must troll through edit summaries to discover if my work was attributed. Not an optimal situation. So, I speak fluent Spanish, can read most Italian, and can get by in Portuguese ... what about the editor who cannot? And what about all of the other articles where work I authored was copied without attribution? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:03, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
And, Doc, I need to point out that none of the words that concerned you were a problem in any of the translations in languages I speak or read. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Done added template for attribution
here
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
02:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The Russian TS article is a translation, by Meddoc13, and the translated text was added on 28 August 2010. [26] There is no attribution in any edit summary or on the Talk Page. Also of interest is that "eponym" was not difficult to translate as it it exactly the same in russian (apart from the Cyrillic script). Graham Beards ( talk) 18:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Done attribution added to the talk page in Russian
[27]
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
02:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
At the top
Tourette syndrome | |
---|---|
Other names | Tourette's syndrome, Tourette's disorder, Gilles de la Tourette syndrome (GTS) |
![]() | |
Georges Gilles de la Tourette (1857–1904), namesake of Tourette syndrome | |
Specialty | Pediatrics, neurology |
Symptoms | Tics [2] |
Usual onset | Childhood [2] |
Duration | Long term [2] |
Causes | Genetic with environmental influence [2] |
Diagnostic method | Based on history and symptoms |
Treatment | Education, therapy, medicine for some cases |
Frequency | About 1% [3] |
At the bottom
Thoughts? We can of course hide the references in the top box if people wish. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
Doc, getting the cruft out of the infobox would be a wonderful improvement. They wouldn't bother me so much if moved to the bottom, as you've done, although they remain inaccurate, hence a problem relative to WP:EL. I wonder why we would link to inaccurate info, but hope we could come to consensus to remove the worst of them from the bottom template. If that would be possible ... love it.
The proposed additions to the infobox, though, will lead to the classic problems with trying to convey complex information in one parameter:
My suggestion-- if you decide you want to go this way-- is to lose the Diff Diagnosis in the proposed infobox, and just replace it with Diagnostic Method. In this case, then, we would say something about No medical tests, based on history and observation and ruling out other conditions. That is more useful info to the likely readers of this article. But I will raise other concerns below. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:57, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
So, we could be changing one set of infobox problems for another. Really like getting those links away from the top prominence, though. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Doc, in this version, with the exception of the problems with Differential diagnosis (mentioned above), your proposal is getting closer to something useful to our readers.
In particular, moving the inaccurate links to the bottom of the page is nice, and some of the infobox parameters you propose might actually encourage readers to further explore the content of the article.
In other words, one thing I am liking is that instead of attempting to be a summary of the condition that can stand-alone, these parameters could lead to additional exploration of the content. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Do you see how much discussion we have had to have to nail down the information in these parameters? Are you prepared to deal with this level of (typical) infobox issues on muliple other health and medicine articles? You would be replacing a series of links with information that needs and requires extended discussion and MEDRS citation, which leads to my next point.
This is an FA; the infobox must be cited. Now, let's look at the problem with this piece of work. DSM 5 was published in 2013. This factsheet was published in 2012, and allegedly updated in 2014. Seriously? Typical of YEARS of problems with them wrt Tourette's information, knowledge, and accuracy.
So, first link our readers would encounter (a source you seem to trust), and we're back to the same problem we started with - faulty links in the infobox. The first paragraph of that source is demonstrably wrong! Those readers who may only read the infobox need to be led to the highest quality, most recent, and most accurate sources ... so we've got additional work cut out for updating infoboxes, if this is the way you want to go. Everything in that box needs high quality, MEDRS-compliant sources. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:35, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Should we go this direction with the infobox, I will continue in my search for a freely available, well-written journal article for sourcing the infobox. I do not want the first link our readers encounter to contain faulty info.
Doc, your bottom template is now in sandbox. What does it take to make this happen? Back tomorrow, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I've reverted edits done by Jaygeeee33 as they appear to violate WP:NPOV, are not attributed to the sources (as they claim they are), and have introduced weasel words and expressions of doubt which are not attributed. Garchy ( talk) 19:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 18 external links on Tourette syndrome. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tourette syndrome. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
User:Jaygeeee33, in this edit you inserted the claim that: "There are also an estimated 25% of cases where there is no evidence of genetic factors." Your edit summary said: "this text is directly from the reference cited". I wonder could you point out in which of the existing three sources that claim can be found, and exactly on which page(s)? Many thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 17:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
When I clicked on the "CBS News video clip" link in the sidebar labeled "Video clips of tics", it sent me to a CBS video about Charlie Rose being suspended amidst allegations of sexual misconduct. 97.127.15.92 ( talk) 22:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
This article begins by talking about "Tourette syndrome" but should it also say that the disorder can be called "Tourette's syndrome"? Vorbee ( talk) 09:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
I did the search in pubmed for reviews and found the following nonfree sources from the last two years, which I have obtained and can provide to anyone who wants them; there are several PMC reviews not listed here:
-- if you want any of them, you can email me. i need to read them and will begin updating based on them when i am ready. Jytdog ( talk) 20:07, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Anecdotal reports have suggested that children with TS have abnormal reactions to gluten, and the chemical manipulation of this protein has been suggested to result in a substance that exacerbates tics.
This article is not listed at PubMed as a review, and is a very weak source-- based on parent anecdote. Also, the only review wrt Tourette and diet that I can locate in PubMed is from 1992. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 06:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I know food and drink can induce tics, for example if I drink strong liquor straight it will make me tic; if i eat lemon and limes it will make me tic but that's just the strong taste setting off my tics; as for a particular diet affecting tics positively or adversely, I wouldn't know about that. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
In this edit, I reduced excess verbiage, removed primary sources, and tightened the prose to agree with the encyclopedic tone of a broad, overview article. However, I am not convinced this text belongs in a broad overview article, which relies almost exclusively (as an FA) on the highest-quality broad reviews of the general topic, rather than the reviews used to cite this text, which are very narrowly focused on the topic of Histamine. To retain this text in the article, a broad review of TS in general that places the H-3 in context wrt pathophysiology should be provided. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 06:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
References
It fits well under classification. And the video is supported by high quality references. It is not an external link. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
@ JJMC89: I asked you this, and you responded with this. Please review WP:BRD and WP:EDITWAR, and use the talk page for discussion rather than reverting. More importantly, could you please explain to me where, in what discussion, the original problems at this article with the bots have been solved? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
avoid change in citation style(02:10, 28 May 2017): InternetArchiveBot does not and did not change the citation style in the prior edit to the article. IABot edited after your edit since
{{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
is malformed.stop citation bot from editing here - shouldn't be adding quotes, not sure who's activating it(13:44, 26 December 2011): The bot is user activated, and using quotes for reference names is the safest form since HTML attributes cannot have spaces,
"
, '
, `
, =
, <
, or >
. The bot won't be preforming the same edit since the duplicate 'Disentangling' reference is no longer in the article.It was said on Sue MacGregor's BBC Radio Four programme "The Reunion" on Friday 13 April that some (but not all) people with Tourette's syndrome bark like dogs. Barking like dogs does not appear to be a characteristic listed in this article. Vorbee ( talk) 08:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Echolalia is listed, that can make one bark like a dog. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:05, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Tiredness, pain and being startled can induce tics in Tourettes sufferers HardeeHar ( talk) 22:59, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I've noticed that it's socially acceptable to mock Tourettes, just search Twitter and you'll find endless tweets of people making comments mocking Tourettes, there's even accounts that tweet nothing but comments mocking Tourettes and nobody criticises it, even Twitter considers it acceptable even though their rules state that it's a rule break to do hateful tweets about disabilities. There was a smear campaign against Donald trump on Twitter, thousands of accounts tweeting that trump had Tourettes to stigmatise him but their was no public outcry criticisiding people for being hateful and Twitter banned nobody for it. People on Twitter created the slang term "Twitter tourettes" as a derogatory term, it's now a commonly used term on Twitter. Twitter is fine with such remarks about Tourettes and doesn't suspend violators even though hateful tweets are against twitters rules. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I just thought I'd point that out as it is quite significant as its different from the social norm, as normally it's socially unacceptable to mock people with disabilities or conditions. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Japan had a forced sterilisation program until 1996 ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_Japan). Apparently their program affected persons with Tourettes.
HardeeHar ( talk) 00:03, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I suggest removing the picture with JFK, Malraux, their spouses and LBJ. To be honest I just wasted 2 minutes of my life reading the legend to understand which one(s) of these characters suffered from Tourette. Only Malraux apparently, - so either a picture of Malraux by himself would do - or else just drop the picture altogether.
The picture of the Soccer player is much more relevant, in that this famous person is also very involved in Tourette-related organizations etc.
MarmotteiNoZ 00:46, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
How about this from his main infobox? It highlights the subject and eliminates the long caption Work permit ( talk) 03:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
References
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 |
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
may not always be correctly identified -> may not always be correctly diagnosed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.241.144.250 ( talk • contribs) 13:37, December 23, 2011
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Pediatric acute-onset neuropsychiatric syndrome (PANS) is a syndrome in which children have abrupt, dramatic onset of Tourette's Syndrome, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), or anorexia nervosa coincident with the presence of two or more neuropsychiatric symptoms. It is believed that these children experience a rise in dopamine levels as a result of a of cross-reactive anti-neuronal antibodies triggered by streptococcal or mycoplasma infection. The cross-reaction is believed to cause such side effects as tics. [1]
Werelived ( talk) 02:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. See above.
elektrik
SHOOS (
talk)
05:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I have moved this statement, based on an old review, to the daughter article, Treatment of Tourette syndrome, where experimental treatments are covered in more detail than typical for a broad overview article. (Mentioning also that I was halfway through upgrading this article to newer sources when the issues at PANDAS and several family funerals took my attention; I plan to return to this upgrade effort in about two weeks. If I find newer, better or different info on nicotine in all of the recent reviews, I'll add that.) Also please note the citation style (manual) in this article (just copy citation directly out of PubMed rather than going through Diberri). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:06, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
> Genetic studies have shown that the overwhelming majority of cases of Tourette's are inherited, although the exact mode of inheritance is not yet known and no gene has been identified. If genetic studies have shown inheritance, it is impossible for no gene(s) or genetic regions to have been identified since, you know, ***that is necessary for a genetic study to show inheritance***. I'm just a lowly IP editor though and thus not worthy to dare even think of editing or tagging your oh so precious featured articles. I never realized that before. Oh well, so much for anon editors being equally welcome to contribute. On point: I cannot tag that self-apparently nonsensical statement for verification and clarification. Can one of you other editors do it please? Thanks. -- 146.115.89.11 ( talk) 07:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Throughout the history of genetics - the entire 20th century - most identifications of traits as 'genetic' - that is, inherited - have been done based on breeding studies, not gene isolation. In fact, it was impossible to identify genes until DNA technology made it possible. For instance, we knew that red hair was inherited long before any 'red hair gene' was identified. This is Biology 101 genetics the most elementary of knowledge, and there is no doubt about it. MarkinBoston ( talk) 19:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Michele Zappella has long described what he termed dysmaturational syndrome or early-onset GTS, where one has transient regressive autism with tics, followed by fully blown, mostly non-pure GTS. The syndrome is differentiated from Landau-Kleffner syndrome by normal EEG. Shouldn't this be noted somewhere in the GTS article? I wanted to add it but thought I better check first lest I've got it the wrong way, given that a featured article failed to include it while it's been around for so long. To be clear my suggestion doesn't necessarily entail hastily promoting Zappella's propositions concerning therapy or classification, in case that was the problem.--What's_the_big_deal?! 03:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arpose ( talk • contribs)
The edit that's been reverted did not refer to a "dysmaturational syndrome" or an "early-onset GTS"; let's please forget about that (sorry I brought it up). As for articles mentioning a relation between (regressive) autism and TS, could one start from here [2]? Again the cases are there. It's not a taxonomy I want added here but possibly useful facts. --What's_the_big_deal?! 09:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arpose ( talk • contribs)
I don't know how to better word the subject, my apologies. However, as someone who suffers from Tourette's and being in their 30s, I found the general consensus of the article to be somewhat odd. It sounded as if TS is something that only really happens to children and fades away as you get older. My lifetime of experience with it has actually seen it become steadily worse as I've gotten older - perhaps because life is more stressful these days with increased worry about bills and other problems. The point I'm trying to make is that the article seems rather misleading. Maybe I'm reading it the wrong way, it's been known to happen, but I can assure anyone that it is not something that "goes away". Likewise, the whole bit about "premonitory urge" is a bit confusing. If I do get urges, not that I've ever really noticed something before an increase in activity, they've never been related to the tics that occur. -- 68.6.234.179 ( talk) 05:13, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I also had an adult onset tic disorder. And there is evidence that this exists, but they do not want to call it tourettes, likely because there are only 13 reported cases in one study (and some of them were cocain users, of which I am not, I was actually a consultant to the FED, before being shot down with my tic disorder.). From the web site "Adult Onset Tic Disorders", "Adult onset tic disorders represent an underrecognised condition that is more common than generally appreciated or reported. The clinical characteristics of adults newly presenting to a movement disorder clinic with tic disorders are reviewed, analysed, and discussed in detail. Clinical evidence supports the concept that tic disorders in adults are part of a range that includes childhood onset tic disorders and Tourette's syndrome." (Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, June 2000, volume 68) 172.243.58.98 ( talk) 05:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand how to use these talk pages so I'm probably doing it wrong, but the main problem is this: The Tourette's page makes it sound as if Coprolalia only exists as possible symptom of Tourette's, which of course is not only false, but is an enormous society-wide misconception that Wikipedia needs to do its best to dispel rather than reinforce. The Coprolalia page does a very good job of making the full extent of the distinction clear, but unfortunately the Tourette's page fails at this (although not nearly as badly as, for example, popular film). Unfortunately, I am now at a complete loss as to how to fix this in a way that SandyGeorgia won't revert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitrode ( talk • contribs) 05:48, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I have twice removed your edits because a) the lead is a summary and should not introduce text not covered in the article; b) the article is an overview and some material is better covered in sub-articles, but more importantly; c) your addition is anecdotal, uncited original research. I removed an edit that added text to the lead that is better included at coprolalia and is UNDUE in the lead. I removed a second edit that replaced accurate info with inaccurate info; coprolalia is related to Tourette's, although not exclusively. For example, PMID 9115463 does not say what you seem to think it says (I have the full article).
Further, most symptoms of most conditions are ... well ... symptoms; many symptoms occur in many conditions. Fever does not occur exclusively with flu, but it is associated with flu, for example. Where on this page does something "make it sound like coprolalia only exists as a symptom of Tourette's"? A full discussion of any symptom of any condition is better included at that symptom's page (eg coprolalia). Additionally, although coprolalia occurs in some other conditions, it is highly associated with Tourette's; your additions extend beyond fact into anecdote, and are not backed by sources.
Perhaps if you can explain where you think this page is misleading about the relationship between coprolalia and TS, we can come to an agreement about how to fix it (if in fact there is a problem), but we can't fix something by a) adding WP:UNDUE or inaccurate text to the lead, or b) adding uncited anecdote. The article already explains that coprolalia is present in a very small minority of people with TS, and additional detail is given at coprolalia. It is unclear to me what you find wrong with the text, but if you could provide a medrs-compliant source that backs your preferred wording, we could adjust.
BTW, I am still extremely busy IRL and might not get back to this immediately ... please allow a few days if I fail to respond. Regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
"Further, most symptoms of most conditions are ... well ... symptoms; many symptoms occur in many conditions. Fever does not occur exclusively with flu, but it is associated with flu, for example[...]Additionally, although coprolalia occurs in some other conditions, it is highly associated with Tourette's"
This is the key part of the problem. Unlike with fever/flu, common public perception is that Tourette's *is* uncontrollable swearing - that each one exclusively implies the other.
You and I may both know perfectly well that Coprolalia is a symptom not exclusively associated with Tourette's, just like fever is not exclusive to the flu. And most people are intelligent enough to know that fever does not imply flu. But, there is very *little* public understanding that Coprolalia does *not* imply Tourette's and vice versa. The Coprolalia page does make this clear, but the Tourette's page fails to even mention at all that Tourette's is not inherently implied by uncontrollable swearing.
Admittedly (and thankfully) the Tourette's page *does* inform readers that Tourette's does not imply uncontrollable swearing, but it fails to inform people of the reverse (that uncontrollable swearing does not imply Tourette's). Considering the widespead "Tourette's == uncontrollable swearing" misconception, it is irresponsible to rely exclusively on the Coprolalia article to clarify this fact. 76.189.120.12 ( talk) 01:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, most often associated with the exclamation of obscene words or socially inappropriate and derogatory remarks (coprolalia), but this symptom is present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's.
Coprolalia (the spontaneous utterance of socially objectionable or taboo words or phrases) is the most publicized symptom of Tourette's, but it is not required for a diagnosis of Tourette's and only about 10% of Tourette's patients exhibit it.
What I have experienced from some movement disorder specialists, is that Step infections cause autoimmune nightmares? The argument concerning the retention of antigen from Strep is still very unknown. The research is evenly split as of my last check on the matter? Idiotsavantmoron ( talk) 17:04, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
I have not been concerned about PANDAS as a cause or diagnosis of tic increase! I am more worried about the unique manifestations of myself as a 35 year old. I am intrigued about something I have lived with and felt get worse. I can't prove but understand how it might in my specific daily life? It feels like a electric current that bounces all around me that never completely "grounds out"? That may not make sense, but I feel it like a lightning bolt that will not ground. I have been a part of and started an adult's with TS support group. All of our ages and intensities are similar but so completely unique! I have seen the most powerful and strangely gifted adults in my life. We all are awesome! I thank Bruse Hologram and the TSA of Ohio, for helping me reach out, so I could meet such beautiful people! My problem is I live in a place that local church's preach Tourette's is the Devil. I am among a few adults that exhibit such a profound case. I will start learning Wikipedia. Any suggestions or comments are greatly appreciated! Excuse the typos and my stupid smart phone. Idiotsavantmoron ( talk) 19:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
This article was nominated for FA status in 2006. That's a long time ago. The standards were much different then, and it's been many years and the article has likely changed drastically since then. Should it be sent to FAR? I would like to see this article one day run on the main page, but I am not sure if it -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 20:34, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I have removed this incorrect edit to restore correct and correctly cited information. Please review WP:OWN, WP:WIAFA and WP:MEDRS. The edit I removed a) introduced a citation style change, and b) replaced a 2011 source with an outdated 2000 source, introducing incorrect information. TS is no longer considered rare, period. Please discuss changes when editing an FA, as this has occurred more than once from the same editor. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
\
Raihop, please review WP:OWN#Featured articles, and gain consensus for edits here on user talk (not at, for example, Doc James talk page). This is not even remotely a mainstream idea in TS research; if you can locate any secondary review mention of it, that would be welcome, but one descriptive case does not warrant addition. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Regarding additions to Tourette_syndrome#Society_and_culture, please review the following and discuss before adding mention of occurrences of TS in the media, in culture, or society:
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:09, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
With respect to this sentence "Extreme Tourette's in adulthood is a rarity, and Tourette's does not adversely affect intelligence or life expectancy."
Have was moved to the first paragraph "Tourette's does not adversely affect intelligence or life expectancy."
The other half was summed up by " but this symptom is present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's" IMO
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
After seven edit conflicts in less than half an hour, and losing multiple responses and explanations, I will quit trying until you are finished. I have already answered and lost my responses to four of your edits. In the future, please lay out your issues first on the talk page -- it will be faster and easier for both of us. Because I've lost multiple responses to you in edit conflict, and I will be busy for the rest of the day and tomorrow morning, I will check back in tomorrow afternoon and address your points one by one. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
OK, I typed up my responses in my sandbox to avoid edit conflicts.
Ideas on how to say this in simpler language? Is the term premonitory needed in the lead? Could we simply say "preceded by an urge"? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Rather than "Comorbid conditions (co-occurring diagnoses other than Tourette's)"
can we say
"Other conditions that commonly occur in people with Tourette's... seen in tertiary specialty clinics"
Not sure if this is needed in the lead "seen in tertiary specialty clinics". Associated conditions is simplier than comorbid conditions.
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
This "These other conditions often cause more impairment to the individual than the tics that are the hallmark of Tourette's; hence, it is important to correctly identify associated conditions and treat them"
is simpler as
"These other conditions often cause more impairment than the tics; hence, it is important to correctly identify associated conditions and treat them."
We already say in the first paragraph that tics are the prime characteristic of the disorder, IMO we do not need to repeat this in paragraph 3. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Doc, in this version, I have gotten most of the changes you suggest (exceptions below). I find this imposed order of the lead clumsy, choppy, and confusing, but I've done it. A lead this choppy would not/should not pass FAC, and I believe the story flowed better by not imposing upon it the same order as the article. With TS, there are just some things that need to be explained before others can be understood. Generally, two kinds of people seek info about TS: parents of newly diagnosed children who are frightened out of their minds because they believe it to be a rare and disabling condition, or people who have encountered extreme media portrayals. The lead no longer addresses what most people seeking info about TS want to know in the order they can most easily digest it. Nonetheless, it is done. I think we've dumbed some very common words, but ... whatever.
What I have not done is take out "wax and wane", because
I have also left in the word "comorbid", because like "premonitory", anyone coming to any article or discussion about Tourette's is going to inevitably and inescapably encounter those two words, so we might as well get them out there and define them.
Please let me know where we stand. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
I would rather leave the remaining terms because ... this is not Simple Wikipedia ... in any literature about TS, these are terms that will be encountered. I feel pretty strongly that we cannot characterize coprolalia as "speaking" because that's just not how it comes out. We have made some improvements, though :0 Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Although a few changes are improvements, I do not find this version to be an overall improvement on the FA version copyedited by Tony1 that passed FAC with an unprecedented (then, and still today) level of support. While some wording changes may be improvements, we have diluted accuracy, and only for the sake of simplicity at times verging on Simple Wikipedia. The biggest damage to the flow resulted from imposing an enforced order of items to conform with an arbitrary notion of how medical leads should be constructed -- the same for every article. By chopping up and removing the paragraph beginning with "Tourette's was once considered a rare and bizarre syndrome, ... " IMO we have changed a narrative that had a logical flow, to a choppy lead that is unpleasing to read and doesn't answer the queries most people first encountering Tourette's are likely to have.
I raise this because I am a bit troubled that I watched the same thing happen to Colin's exemplary Ketogenic diet. Doc, please consider it is not always imperative that History come last, and removing the "once considered rare" to the end, only because it sounds like "History", has damaged the flow here. You've made some good suggestions, but this arbitrary order has damaged the overall flow.
I'm also wondering why, if these words were so hard to understand, that this lead stood for 10 years without any reader expressing that problem, in an article with substantial page views. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
I looked here after seeing mention of it on some user talk pages. I'm far from having made a careful study, but my gut reaction is to think that Sandy and Colin are making good points. I guess I can see how simpler language is easier to translate (not that I regard that as a primary objective, because I don't), but I would think that any language can be translated into another language if the translators are good enough at it (and in hypertext, any isolated incidence of a word or phrase that does not translate precisely can be readily clarified in the target language). I also do not think we are writing for readers who are non-fluent in English. I do believe that we should write for a general audience, rather than for specialists, but again, hypertext makes it easy to define unfamiliar terms. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 22:08, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
OK, I can live with this version. I've merged some sentences to eliminate the choppiness, moved things around a wee bit without changing Doc's preferred order, adjusted a few words, and worked in a bit of new text to make the new organization flow better. Comments? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
By the way, Doc's move of the significant names for TS to the infobox, and out of the lead, is not in agreement with MOS:BOLDTITLE (and FAs must conform to MOS). Don't much care, but the text in the infobox is barely legible, and those are "real" names of the condition depending on the country one lives in. I understand they were taken out of the lead to make it simpler, but then the stupid infobox needs to have a better font. (Have never wanted this infobox here anyway because it forces the article to knowingly link to sources that contain faulty info ... but we've had that discussion before.) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:44, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Edit on Wikidata --> Disease? TS is not a disease. The official ICD name for the condition isn't even listed there (Combined vocal and multiple motor tic disorder [de la Tourette]).
Medline entry: [8]
Why must we link to incorrect and useless information because an infobox has the field????
MESH entry: [9]
Gene reviews: [10]
OMIM [11]
Diseases database [12]
OK, featured articles are supposed to be comprehensive; this article is. And yet an infobox forces us to link to inaccurate and outdated information which adds NOTHING to the article. I have never wanted the infobox; I am removing the faulty sources. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Jyt, [13] point by point, above, explain why. Standard practice? Have you seen the arbcase? Why are we pointing our readers-- prominently at the top of the infobox-- to known inaccuracies and outdated information? What purpose does this serve? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:12, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I do not think any of them must be kept. Medline plus is not the best source but easy to understand.
I've run out of steam for the day ... could you look at the epidemiology post above so we can finalize that point, if you concur? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:54, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Discussion continued at Talk:Tourette_syndrome#Splitting_the_infobox. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:29, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
from discussion at WT:MED....
Now that I know why Doc James did this ...
If I regain interest after this experience, I will at my leisure, step back through and make the necessary fixes. I can retain some of the necessary wording changes, while restoring the essentials as mentioned by Colin. If I care anymore. At least now the article is not inaccurate as Doc's first version was -- it is only dumbed down and awkward. Since I spend limited time on Wikipedia these days, I am unsure when or if I will attempt this.
Doc, I am glad to finally understand why you did this, because I found it to be a most bewildering encounter with you, not understanding why you barged in here after ten years and unilaterally rewrote the lead. So my suggestions to you are:
For now I have other things to work on. I wrote about 70% of this article (some as IPs before I registered an account). I see it has been copied almost verbatim on multiple translations, including several featured. If the correct attribution was not done on those translations, I have a copyright/attribution concern. Personally. I hope it is not a legal threat to say that I intend to investigate how the matter of correct attribution works on interwiki translation. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:32, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl appears to be barely active; this is what I have found:
which is pretty useless, because I would need to find the templates on the other-language Wiki. Would it be more expedient to send a DMCA takedown notice to the Wiki Foundation for every other language TS article, and let them sort their mess? Does a takedown notice by a Wikipedian breach No Legal Threats? IF so, how am I to locate all of these templates in all of these languages? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
I will focus on the Italian and Spanish articles, since I do speak those languages and can determine if there is a problem with lack of attribution on content I wrote, and if that lack of attribution results in a take-down per DMCA.
Please don't email me on this, because I long ago lost my passwords and need to work on restoring my email account. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
An editor who admits knowing nothing of the topic brings the article to Featured level on another Wiki. This is a problem with translations that has long concerned me, and should concern all of us-- no one who isn't immersed in the topic and the sources should be translating. Still looking for attribution of content I wrote on no.wikipedia. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
My suggestion as a warning to readers about possible problems introduced by translators who do not know the topic is that there should be a template on the article, or at least on the talk page. Is anyone familiar with the topic maintaining the five-year-old Norway version to Featured standards? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
It gives the revision number which is nice "Revision as of 22:29, 5 December 2010 by Runareggen (talk | contribs) (Translated from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome (revision: 392451580) using http://translate.google.com/toolkit with about 49% human translations.)" Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 20:12, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Done added tag
[20]
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
03:03, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The Italian featured article has a talk page template on translation: "Questa voce contiene una traduzione, completa o parziale, della voce originale: Tourette syndrome» tratta da en.wikipedia.org. Consulta la cronologia della pagina originale per conoscere l'elenco degli autori." [21] I suggest a link to the version copied so readers will know how out of date and corrupted the translation becomes.
The template was added 28 Sept 2016. [22] We are left to guess which edits were translated, but looking at contributions on 9 Sept from the same editor who added the template, we still can't tell. Does this satisfy our attribution requirement?
More significantly, the Italians also have a medical warning to readers at the top, as does the Norway version, at the bottom. In addition to the numerous problems with medical content on Wikipedia, we now have translation issues as well. Perhaps my efforts will be better spent on renewing the effort to get a reader warning on Wikipedia's English content. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:23, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, the Spanish article is crap, but here we have significant portions copied verbatim without attribution. [23] That content was authored mostly by Tony1, Colin, Eubulides, Fvasconcellos and me. In previous edit, [24], a template was added that does not seem to satisfy our enduring requirement for attribution in either edit summary, or less desirably, on talk page. The template doesn't cover which text was added in multiple subsequent edits. Then Evasive removes the translation template, and I find none on talk, so there is no record of attribution of specific text. Evasivo is awarded on talk by Doc James as top medical editor, so I suspect we are seeing a classic example on the Spanish Wikipedia of what is going on elsewhere. (Nice translation, Evasivo, and I notice you didn't seem to have any problem with the words Doc James found difficult.) I would like the attribution to this article to be corrected, or the text taken down. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
The lead of the Portuguese TS article is also a translation from en.wiki. [25] No template on the article, no template on talk, so I must troll through edit summaries to discover if my work was attributed. Not an optimal situation. So, I speak fluent Spanish, can read most Italian, and can get by in Portuguese ... what about the editor who cannot? And what about all of the other articles where work I authored was copied without attribution? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:03, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
And, Doc, I need to point out that none of the words that concerned you were a problem in any of the translations in languages I speak or read. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Done added template for attribution
here
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
02:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The Russian TS article is a translation, by Meddoc13, and the translated text was added on 28 August 2010. [26] There is no attribution in any edit summary or on the Talk Page. Also of interest is that "eponym" was not difficult to translate as it it exactly the same in russian (apart from the Cyrillic script). Graham Beards ( talk) 18:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Done attribution added to the talk page in Russian
[27]
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
02:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
At the top
Tourette syndrome | |
---|---|
Other names | Tourette's syndrome, Tourette's disorder, Gilles de la Tourette syndrome (GTS) |
![]() | |
Georges Gilles de la Tourette (1857–1904), namesake of Tourette syndrome | |
Specialty | Pediatrics, neurology |
Symptoms | Tics [2] |
Usual onset | Childhood [2] |
Duration | Long term [2] |
Causes | Genetic with environmental influence [2] |
Diagnostic method | Based on history and symptoms |
Treatment | Education, therapy, medicine for some cases |
Frequency | About 1% [3] |
At the bottom
Thoughts? We can of course hide the references in the top box if people wish. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 19:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
Doc, getting the cruft out of the infobox would be a wonderful improvement. They wouldn't bother me so much if moved to the bottom, as you've done, although they remain inaccurate, hence a problem relative to WP:EL. I wonder why we would link to inaccurate info, but hope we could come to consensus to remove the worst of them from the bottom template. If that would be possible ... love it.
The proposed additions to the infobox, though, will lead to the classic problems with trying to convey complex information in one parameter:
My suggestion-- if you decide you want to go this way-- is to lose the Diff Diagnosis in the proposed infobox, and just replace it with Diagnostic Method. In this case, then, we would say something about No medical tests, based on history and observation and ruling out other conditions. That is more useful info to the likely readers of this article. But I will raise other concerns below. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:57, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
So, we could be changing one set of infobox problems for another. Really like getting those links away from the top prominence, though. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Doc, in this version, with the exception of the problems with Differential diagnosis (mentioned above), your proposal is getting closer to something useful to our readers.
In particular, moving the inaccurate links to the bottom of the page is nice, and some of the infobox parameters you propose might actually encourage readers to further explore the content of the article.
In other words, one thing I am liking is that instead of attempting to be a summary of the condition that can stand-alone, these parameters could lead to additional exploration of the content. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Do you see how much discussion we have had to have to nail down the information in these parameters? Are you prepared to deal with this level of (typical) infobox issues on muliple other health and medicine articles? You would be replacing a series of links with information that needs and requires extended discussion and MEDRS citation, which leads to my next point.
This is an FA; the infobox must be cited. Now, let's look at the problem with this piece of work. DSM 5 was published in 2013. This factsheet was published in 2012, and allegedly updated in 2014. Seriously? Typical of YEARS of problems with them wrt Tourette's information, knowledge, and accuracy.
So, first link our readers would encounter (a source you seem to trust), and we're back to the same problem we started with - faulty links in the infobox. The first paragraph of that source is demonstrably wrong! Those readers who may only read the infobox need to be led to the highest quality, most recent, and most accurate sources ... so we've got additional work cut out for updating infoboxes, if this is the way you want to go. Everything in that box needs high quality, MEDRS-compliant sources. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:35, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Should we go this direction with the infobox, I will continue in my search for a freely available, well-written journal article for sourcing the infobox. I do not want the first link our readers encounter to contain faulty info.
Doc, your bottom template is now in sandbox. What does it take to make this happen? Back tomorrow, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I've reverted edits done by Jaygeeee33 as they appear to violate WP:NPOV, are not attributed to the sources (as they claim they are), and have introduced weasel words and expressions of doubt which are not attributed. Garchy ( talk) 19:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 18 external links on Tourette syndrome. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tourette syndrome. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
User:Jaygeeee33, in this edit you inserted the claim that: "There are also an estimated 25% of cases where there is no evidence of genetic factors." Your edit summary said: "this text is directly from the reference cited". I wonder could you point out in which of the existing three sources that claim can be found, and exactly on which page(s)? Many thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 17:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
When I clicked on the "CBS News video clip" link in the sidebar labeled "Video clips of tics", it sent me to a CBS video about Charlie Rose being suspended amidst allegations of sexual misconduct. 97.127.15.92 ( talk) 22:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
This article begins by talking about "Tourette syndrome" but should it also say that the disorder can be called "Tourette's syndrome"? Vorbee ( talk) 09:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
I did the search in pubmed for reviews and found the following nonfree sources from the last two years, which I have obtained and can provide to anyone who wants them; there are several PMC reviews not listed here:
-- if you want any of them, you can email me. i need to read them and will begin updating based on them when i am ready. Jytdog ( talk) 20:07, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Anecdotal reports have suggested that children with TS have abnormal reactions to gluten, and the chemical manipulation of this protein has been suggested to result in a substance that exacerbates tics.
This article is not listed at PubMed as a review, and is a very weak source-- based on parent anecdote. Also, the only review wrt Tourette and diet that I can locate in PubMed is from 1992. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 06:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I know food and drink can induce tics, for example if I drink strong liquor straight it will make me tic; if i eat lemon and limes it will make me tic but that's just the strong taste setting off my tics; as for a particular diet affecting tics positively or adversely, I wouldn't know about that. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
In this edit, I reduced excess verbiage, removed primary sources, and tightened the prose to agree with the encyclopedic tone of a broad, overview article. However, I am not convinced this text belongs in a broad overview article, which relies almost exclusively (as an FA) on the highest-quality broad reviews of the general topic, rather than the reviews used to cite this text, which are very narrowly focused on the topic of Histamine. To retain this text in the article, a broad review of TS in general that places the H-3 in context wrt pathophysiology should be provided. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 06:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
References
It fits well under classification. And the video is supported by high quality references. It is not an external link. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
@ JJMC89: I asked you this, and you responded with this. Please review WP:BRD and WP:EDITWAR, and use the talk page for discussion rather than reverting. More importantly, could you please explain to me where, in what discussion, the original problems at this article with the bots have been solved? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
avoid change in citation style(02:10, 28 May 2017): InternetArchiveBot does not and did not change the citation style in the prior edit to the article. IABot edited after your edit since
{{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
is malformed.stop citation bot from editing here - shouldn't be adding quotes, not sure who's activating it(13:44, 26 December 2011): The bot is user activated, and using quotes for reference names is the safest form since HTML attributes cannot have spaces,
"
, '
, `
, =
, <
, or >
. The bot won't be preforming the same edit since the duplicate 'Disentangling' reference is no longer in the article.It was said on Sue MacGregor's BBC Radio Four programme "The Reunion" on Friday 13 April that some (but not all) people with Tourette's syndrome bark like dogs. Barking like dogs does not appear to be a characteristic listed in this article. Vorbee ( talk) 08:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Echolalia is listed, that can make one bark like a dog. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:05, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Tiredness, pain and being startled can induce tics in Tourettes sufferers HardeeHar ( talk) 22:59, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I've noticed that it's socially acceptable to mock Tourettes, just search Twitter and you'll find endless tweets of people making comments mocking Tourettes, there's even accounts that tweet nothing but comments mocking Tourettes and nobody criticises it, even Twitter considers it acceptable even though their rules state that it's a rule break to do hateful tweets about disabilities. There was a smear campaign against Donald trump on Twitter, thousands of accounts tweeting that trump had Tourettes to stigmatise him but their was no public outcry criticisiding people for being hateful and Twitter banned nobody for it. People on Twitter created the slang term "Twitter tourettes" as a derogatory term, it's now a commonly used term on Twitter. Twitter is fine with such remarks about Tourettes and doesn't suspend violators even though hateful tweets are against twitters rules. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
I just thought I'd point that out as it is quite significant as its different from the social norm, as normally it's socially unacceptable to mock people with disabilities or conditions. HardeeHar ( talk) 23:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Japan had a forced sterilisation program until 1996 ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_Japan). Apparently their program affected persons with Tourettes.
HardeeHar ( talk) 00:03, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I suggest removing the picture with JFK, Malraux, their spouses and LBJ. To be honest I just wasted 2 minutes of my life reading the legend to understand which one(s) of these characters suffered from Tourette. Only Malraux apparently, - so either a picture of Malraux by himself would do - or else just drop the picture altogether.
The picture of the Soccer player is much more relevant, in that this famous person is also very involved in Tourette-related organizations etc.
MarmotteiNoZ 00:46, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
How about this from his main infobox? It highlights the subject and eliminates the long caption Work permit ( talk) 03:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
References