![]() | XXXYY syndrome has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: November 22, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from XXXYY syndrome appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 October 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
The result was: promoted by
Lightburst
talk
18:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Moved to mainspace by Vaticidalprophet ( talk). Self-nominated at 08:55, 27 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/XXXYY syndrome; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
@
Vaticidalprophet: I think you've met all the requirements pretty comfortably, including the QPQ review. Well done at explaining this tricky situation, and to be honest, I agree with what both you and @
Ajpolino: wrote in the original discussion: accuracy is the most important thing here, and maybe you could just add a brief footnote to further justify the eight-case count. About the hook itself, I actually think you should stick to "males", since the first cited article explicitly acknowledges two cases in infants, and you used that term in the article's lead section, anyway... Still, great job overall!
Oltrepier (
talk)
15:51, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Vaticidal prophet 03:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
I noticed this article terms it a "chromosome disorder" while the Wikipedia article on the subject is listed under " chromosome abnormality". If you search Google scholar the latter is more common by 5-10 times. The google dictionary tells me that disorder is defined as "an illness or condition that disrupts normal physical or mental functions", but I'm not sure if this is the case for all chromosome abnormalities. ( t · c) buidhe 03:18, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: RoySmith ( talk · contribs) 23:27, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
No issues.
No issues.
One question that keeps going through my mind is "when does the nondisjunction event happen"? I assume it must be at the first cell division? Otherwise, you'd have one cell line that was XXXYY and another that was normal, and the resulting fetus would be a chimera of both. This should be clarified.
almost never recurs in future children. You might want to clarify that "future children" means siblings of the XXXYY, not children of the XXXYY. I'm assuming all XXXYY are infertile, but still worth making this clear. Also, given that there are only 8 recorded cases, I'm confused by the "almost never". Have there ever been any reported cases of siblings who are both XXXYY?
This needs a second opinion from somebody who is an expert in human genetics. RoySmith (talk) 18:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Reviewer: Maxim Masiutin ( talk · contribs) 13:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
The lead section has 2 paragraphs that is according
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section is commensurate with that of the article. The lead section adequately reiterates the contents of the article in shortened form.
According to
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles, there are the following sections recommended for a medical condition.
The following list of suggested headings contains wikilinks; the actual headings should not.
The target audience seems to be for a general reader and the text it looks good for my eyes.
The article conforms to the general rules and requirements stipulated at
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles except where I noted otherwise on specific topics. The article should be clearly written, in good prose, with correct spelling and grammar.
Each paragraph ends with a citation (except the lead), most (if not all) citations are reliable.
The article broadly covers the topic without unnecessary digressions.
The article is written from the neutral point of view.
The article is stable, with no ongoing edit wars.
The article complies with image use policy.
The article has no obvious copyright violations.
The article is partially compliant. It lacks information that I mentioned in the section #Correct article structure of my review. If this information is added, the article may pass unless new issues will be discovered. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 11:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style or its subpages is not required for good articlesso I don't think you can insist on the changes suggested in #Correct article structure. I apologize for not being more specific in my request for a 2O, but I was mostly looking for somebody who could speak authoritatively on the issue of whether XXXYY individuals should be called male. RoySmith (talk) 16:09, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
XXXYY can be detected by sex chromosome aneuploidy screening and genomic newborn screening. The articles on these methods are at Talk:XXXYY_syndrome#Literature on newborn screening methods that can detect XXXYY syndrome
Articles that expressly mention XXXYY in context of newborn screening are at Talk:XXXYY_syndrome#Articles that expressly mention XXXYY in context of newborn screening Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 18:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
2nd reviewer's update: My initial reasoning was that the article lacks information that I mentioned in the section #Correct article structure of my review, so that ff this information is added, the article may pass unless new issues will be discovered. Still, the nominating editor provided solid reasoning on why that requirement was excessive beyound the proper level of criteria defined for the GA, therefore, my initial requirements were excessive for this particular topic and the initial decision was incorrect, therefore, to correct the decision, I have to change the decision on my review result from Fail to Pass. My initial opinion on p.1b of the criteria was incorrect, as suggested by the other Wikipedia editors. For details on the reasoning, see the discussion at [2]
November 22nd review result: Pass.
Maxim Masiutin (
talk)
07:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
On what basis are all individuals with XXXYY chromosomes considered "male"? After all, according to people on Twitter who call me mentally ill for asking the question, "male" specificially means XY chromosomes, and anyone who says otherwise is probably a groomer. 2600:8801:1CA5:700:2DDB:B4F9:58BD:1BDE ( talk) 19:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
User:Vaticidalprophet metioned at [ [3]] (quote) "this isn't really accurate -- even in the position where some SCAs are intersex that's not applied to all of them, and this isn't one for which the topic has been discussed, so it coatracks to clearly declare it one".
Could you please specify where it was discussed? I reviewed the talk page and didn't find a thorough discussion. I reviewed again the definitions of DSD and Intersex given in the medical literature. These definitions seem to match perfectly, as there are both chromosomal and gonadal deviations, such as (quote): "low testosterone, alongside elevated lutenizing hormone and follicle stimulating hormone", "genital abnormalities are a hallmark of the syndrome", "micropenis and cryptorchidism (undescended testes)", "sparse or absent facial hair", "high-pitched voices".
Please help. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 11:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Here are some ideas on how the article can be improved:
Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 22:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Please consider reviewing the literature on new and potential newborn screening methods that can detect XXXYY syndrome, so that information to be included into the article. In this specific case, the newborn and prenatal screening topic is widely covered in reliable literature (secondary sources such as reviews, meta-analysis or books, for example, these are the titles of the publications indexed on MEDLINE about the newborn and prenatal screening for XXXYY syndrome and other conditions of sex chromosome aneuploidy:
Not all articles may provide relevant information for this article. For instance, articles about prenatal diagnostics may not directly apply to newborn screening because they have different objectives. Newborn diagnostics are usually done when there are known concerns in the family history, while prenatal diagnostics aim to identify conditions during pregnancy. As XXXYY syndrome is not inherited, prenatal diagnostic testing specifically for this syndrome is not necessary. Newborn screening methods such as karyotyping or genome sequencing can still be valuable as they can detect sex chromosome abnormalities, including XXXYY syndrome. Articles about newborn screening can offer insights and information that enhance the content of this article. Incorporating literature and resources related to research directions in newborn screening would be beneficial. These sources can provide information on emerging advancements and future possibilities in diagnosing and managing XXXYY syndrome. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 02:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Please also consider writing about newborn screening based on the following articles which expressly mention XXXYY in context of newborn screening:
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)You can also look for similar articles that mention expressly XXXYY in context of newborn screening. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 17:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
We strive to provide comprehensive information about the XXXYY syndrome on the Wikipedia page, but we also want to avoid repeating the same content that is relevant to other articles. One way to do this is to use Transclusion, which automatically includes parts of text from one page to another. For example, we could use Transclusion to insert a section about the newborn screening issues common for all variants of sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA). Alternatively, we could briefly summarize the screening issues and then link to a separate article covering them in more detail. This would help the readers to get a complete overview of the basic concepts, such as screening and management, without having to search for them elsewhere. However, we should be careful not to use Transclusion or linking in a way that violates the GA or FA criteria, such as by creating unstable or inconsistent pages. Another issue we face is that the pages for different SCA variations (i.e., XXY, XYY, XXXX, XXXY, XXXYY, and so on) have different levels of coverage and quality. Some pages have more information than others on topics that are common for all SCA variations, such as meiosis. This creates a problem of imbalance and duplication, as well as a potential for confusion and misunderstanding. We should strive to make the pages for all SCA variations equally informative and accurate by following the same standards and guidelines. One possible solution is to create a separate page that explains the general aspects of SCA, such as meiosis, and then link to it from the pages for each specific variation. This would ensure that the readers can access the same information regardless of which variation they are interested in and that the information is consistent and reliable. This would also make the pages for each variation more focused and concise by avoiding unnecessary repetition and redundancy. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 23:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Vaticidalprophet, if you wish to find very good reviewers, please consider publishing this article (or any other article) in the WikiJournal of Medicine. It is an academic journal run by the same foundation that runs Wikipedia. The editorial board of the journal will find good reviewers who have works on this or related topics published in academic journals. After you pass the review process, improving the article based on revers' feedback and get the article published, you will be able to copy the contents back to Wikipedia. My experience on WikiJournal of Medicine is very positive. I once was working on an article on alternative androgen biosynthesis and the editorial board attracted the two of the best if not the best specialist in the world on androgen biosyntheisis who had lots of research works and reviews published on androgen biosyntheisis in various academic journals. Therefore, if you wish to find an expert on genetics or conditions like that, WikiJournal of Medicine is the place to find experts. You can see typical articles published there at https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_of_Medicine -- for each of the articles, there is a link "Reviewer comments" that shows communication between the reviewers and the authors.
The journal follows a transparent and open peer review process, allowing for constructive criticism and suggestions from multiple reviewers. The editorial board finds at least two reviewers who are experts in the field, but other reviewers may also join. The editorial board is the moderator should any issue arise like disagreement among different reviewers on a particular topic. This can greatly enhance the quality and accuracy of the article submitted there, as well as provide valuable insights and perspectives. The journal is indexed in many catalogs such as Google Scholar or Semantic scholars, but is not yet accepted by MEDLINE, still, I hope MEDLINE will accept it in the future. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 09:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | XXXYY syndrome has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: November 22, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from XXXYY syndrome appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 October 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
The result was: promoted by
Lightburst
talk
18:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Moved to mainspace by Vaticidalprophet ( talk). Self-nominated at 08:55, 27 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/XXXYY syndrome; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
@
Vaticidalprophet: I think you've met all the requirements pretty comfortably, including the QPQ review. Well done at explaining this tricky situation, and to be honest, I agree with what both you and @
Ajpolino: wrote in the original discussion: accuracy is the most important thing here, and maybe you could just add a brief footnote to further justify the eight-case count. About the hook itself, I actually think you should stick to "males", since the first cited article explicitly acknowledges two cases in infants, and you used that term in the article's lead section, anyway... Still, great job overall!
Oltrepier (
talk)
15:51, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Vaticidal prophet 03:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
I noticed this article terms it a "chromosome disorder" while the Wikipedia article on the subject is listed under " chromosome abnormality". If you search Google scholar the latter is more common by 5-10 times. The google dictionary tells me that disorder is defined as "an illness or condition that disrupts normal physical or mental functions", but I'm not sure if this is the case for all chromosome abnormalities. ( t · c) buidhe 03:18, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: RoySmith ( talk · contribs) 23:27, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
No issues.
No issues.
One question that keeps going through my mind is "when does the nondisjunction event happen"? I assume it must be at the first cell division? Otherwise, you'd have one cell line that was XXXYY and another that was normal, and the resulting fetus would be a chimera of both. This should be clarified.
almost never recurs in future children. You might want to clarify that "future children" means siblings of the XXXYY, not children of the XXXYY. I'm assuming all XXXYY are infertile, but still worth making this clear. Also, given that there are only 8 recorded cases, I'm confused by the "almost never". Have there ever been any reported cases of siblings who are both XXXYY?
This needs a second opinion from somebody who is an expert in human genetics. RoySmith (talk) 18:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Reviewer: Maxim Masiutin ( talk · contribs) 13:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
The lead section has 2 paragraphs that is according
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section is commensurate with that of the article. The lead section adequately reiterates the contents of the article in shortened form.
According to
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles, there are the following sections recommended for a medical condition.
The following list of suggested headings contains wikilinks; the actual headings should not.
The target audience seems to be for a general reader and the text it looks good for my eyes.
The article conforms to the general rules and requirements stipulated at
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles except where I noted otherwise on specific topics. The article should be clearly written, in good prose, with correct spelling and grammar.
Each paragraph ends with a citation (except the lead), most (if not all) citations are reliable.
The article broadly covers the topic without unnecessary digressions.
The article is written from the neutral point of view.
The article is stable, with no ongoing edit wars.
The article complies with image use policy.
The article has no obvious copyright violations.
The article is partially compliant. It lacks information that I mentioned in the section #Correct article structure of my review. If this information is added, the article may pass unless new issues will be discovered. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 11:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style or its subpages is not required for good articlesso I don't think you can insist on the changes suggested in #Correct article structure. I apologize for not being more specific in my request for a 2O, but I was mostly looking for somebody who could speak authoritatively on the issue of whether XXXYY individuals should be called male. RoySmith (talk) 16:09, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
XXXYY can be detected by sex chromosome aneuploidy screening and genomic newborn screening. The articles on these methods are at Talk:XXXYY_syndrome#Literature on newborn screening methods that can detect XXXYY syndrome
Articles that expressly mention XXXYY in context of newborn screening are at Talk:XXXYY_syndrome#Articles that expressly mention XXXYY in context of newborn screening Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 18:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
2nd reviewer's update: My initial reasoning was that the article lacks information that I mentioned in the section #Correct article structure of my review, so that ff this information is added, the article may pass unless new issues will be discovered. Still, the nominating editor provided solid reasoning on why that requirement was excessive beyound the proper level of criteria defined for the GA, therefore, my initial requirements were excessive for this particular topic and the initial decision was incorrect, therefore, to correct the decision, I have to change the decision on my review result from Fail to Pass. My initial opinion on p.1b of the criteria was incorrect, as suggested by the other Wikipedia editors. For details on the reasoning, see the discussion at [2]
November 22nd review result: Pass.
Maxim Masiutin (
talk)
07:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
On what basis are all individuals with XXXYY chromosomes considered "male"? After all, according to people on Twitter who call me mentally ill for asking the question, "male" specificially means XY chromosomes, and anyone who says otherwise is probably a groomer. 2600:8801:1CA5:700:2DDB:B4F9:58BD:1BDE ( talk) 19:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
User:Vaticidalprophet metioned at [ [3]] (quote) "this isn't really accurate -- even in the position where some SCAs are intersex that's not applied to all of them, and this isn't one for which the topic has been discussed, so it coatracks to clearly declare it one".
Could you please specify where it was discussed? I reviewed the talk page and didn't find a thorough discussion. I reviewed again the definitions of DSD and Intersex given in the medical literature. These definitions seem to match perfectly, as there are both chromosomal and gonadal deviations, such as (quote): "low testosterone, alongside elevated lutenizing hormone and follicle stimulating hormone", "genital abnormalities are a hallmark of the syndrome", "micropenis and cryptorchidism (undescended testes)", "sparse or absent facial hair", "high-pitched voices".
Please help. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 11:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Here are some ideas on how the article can be improved:
Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 22:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Please consider reviewing the literature on new and potential newborn screening methods that can detect XXXYY syndrome, so that information to be included into the article. In this specific case, the newborn and prenatal screening topic is widely covered in reliable literature (secondary sources such as reviews, meta-analysis or books, for example, these are the titles of the publications indexed on MEDLINE about the newborn and prenatal screening for XXXYY syndrome and other conditions of sex chromosome aneuploidy:
Not all articles may provide relevant information for this article. For instance, articles about prenatal diagnostics may not directly apply to newborn screening because they have different objectives. Newborn diagnostics are usually done when there are known concerns in the family history, while prenatal diagnostics aim to identify conditions during pregnancy. As XXXYY syndrome is not inherited, prenatal diagnostic testing specifically for this syndrome is not necessary. Newborn screening methods such as karyotyping or genome sequencing can still be valuable as they can detect sex chromosome abnormalities, including XXXYY syndrome. Articles about newborn screening can offer insights and information that enhance the content of this article. Incorporating literature and resources related to research directions in newborn screening would be beneficial. These sources can provide information on emerging advancements and future possibilities in diagnosing and managing XXXYY syndrome. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 02:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Please also consider writing about newborn screening based on the following articles which expressly mention XXXYY in context of newborn screening:
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)You can also look for similar articles that mention expressly XXXYY in context of newborn screening. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 17:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
We strive to provide comprehensive information about the XXXYY syndrome on the Wikipedia page, but we also want to avoid repeating the same content that is relevant to other articles. One way to do this is to use Transclusion, which automatically includes parts of text from one page to another. For example, we could use Transclusion to insert a section about the newborn screening issues common for all variants of sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA). Alternatively, we could briefly summarize the screening issues and then link to a separate article covering them in more detail. This would help the readers to get a complete overview of the basic concepts, such as screening and management, without having to search for them elsewhere. However, we should be careful not to use Transclusion or linking in a way that violates the GA or FA criteria, such as by creating unstable or inconsistent pages. Another issue we face is that the pages for different SCA variations (i.e., XXY, XYY, XXXX, XXXY, XXXYY, and so on) have different levels of coverage and quality. Some pages have more information than others on topics that are common for all SCA variations, such as meiosis. This creates a problem of imbalance and duplication, as well as a potential for confusion and misunderstanding. We should strive to make the pages for all SCA variations equally informative and accurate by following the same standards and guidelines. One possible solution is to create a separate page that explains the general aspects of SCA, such as meiosis, and then link to it from the pages for each specific variation. This would ensure that the readers can access the same information regardless of which variation they are interested in and that the information is consistent and reliable. This would also make the pages for each variation more focused and concise by avoiding unnecessary repetition and redundancy. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 23:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Vaticidalprophet, if you wish to find very good reviewers, please consider publishing this article (or any other article) in the WikiJournal of Medicine. It is an academic journal run by the same foundation that runs Wikipedia. The editorial board of the journal will find good reviewers who have works on this or related topics published in academic journals. After you pass the review process, improving the article based on revers' feedback and get the article published, you will be able to copy the contents back to Wikipedia. My experience on WikiJournal of Medicine is very positive. I once was working on an article on alternative androgen biosynthesis and the editorial board attracted the two of the best if not the best specialist in the world on androgen biosyntheisis who had lots of research works and reviews published on androgen biosyntheisis in various academic journals. Therefore, if you wish to find an expert on genetics or conditions like that, WikiJournal of Medicine is the place to find experts. You can see typical articles published there at https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_of_Medicine -- for each of the articles, there is a link "Reviewer comments" that shows communication between the reviewers and the authors.
The journal follows a transparent and open peer review process, allowing for constructive criticism and suggestions from multiple reviewers. The editorial board finds at least two reviewers who are experts in the field, but other reviewers may also join. The editorial board is the moderator should any issue arise like disagreement among different reviewers on a particular topic. This can greatly enhance the quality and accuracy of the article submitted there, as well as provide valuable insights and perspectives. The journal is indexed in many catalogs such as Google Scholar or Semantic scholars, but is not yet accepted by MEDLINE, still, I hope MEDLINE will accept it in the future. Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 09:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)