Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Jacksonian seizure. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine: Neurology Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This redirect is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Neuroscience Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The 'Presentation' section presents original research. One individual used information from his/her personal medical history. Such information belongs in a private medical record kept by this person's doctor. This very private information DOES NOT belong in a globally available encyclopedia. Personal medical information should be replaced with information from published medical literature. There should be plenty of peer-reviewed, published, reliable sources for this subject. — 74.61.141.228 ( talk) 22:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC) reply

A case description might be appropriate if it came from a reliable source, but you're right, this first-person account with no sourcing is obviously unencyclopedic, and I have removed it. Looie496 ( talk) 18:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC) reply