Template:Did you know nominations/Ii antigen system
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Edge3 (talk) 17:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ii antigen system
- ... that having the adult i phenotype, a rare blood type, is associated with being born with cataracts? Source: [1]
- ALT1:... that a person's blood type under the Ii antigen system changes during their development? Source: [2]
- ALT2:... that unlike most other blood groups, the Ii antigen system is not determined by different alleles? Source: starting at p.48[3]
5x expanded by Igarnish (talk). Self-nominated at 22:33, 31 January 2021 (UTC).
A 5x expansion has been verified and no close paraphrasing was found. Among the three hooks, the first one is probably the most interesting, but it's slightly imprecise: the article suggests that the association has mainly been seen in two groups (Japanese and Taiwanese people) and it's not necessarily a general finding, and so that hook may need to be revised. ALT0 is cited to two sources; the first is paywalled and I can't log in to my institution e-mail to try to give it a look and so I am assuming good faith (although it is noted that the abstract doesn't actually mention cataracts, only the keywords), while the information appears to be mentioned in the second source. The nominator has no prior DYK credits so no QPQ is required. As I have less experience reviewing medical articles, a second opinion from a more experienced editor would also be appreciated. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, Narutolovehinata5! I tried to come up with some alternatives on the topic of ALT0 but I worry they're still imprecise. For context, here's a short excerpt from the paywalled source:
"In Japan, adult i phenotype is almost invariably accompanied by cataracts. [...] In people of European origin, adult i phenotype is not generally accompanied by congenital cataract, but the association has been reported in two Caucasian families, in four Arab and one Persian Jewish families from Israel, and in two Pakistani families."
[4] - So I hesitate to be more specific in just a one sentence DYK about where the association is or isn't found. I don't love the "some" in ALT3, though. ALT4 uses "a" gene variant to leave space for other alleles which cause adult i without cataract.
- ALT3:... that the adult i phenotype, a rare blood type, has been associated with being born with cataracts in some populations?
- ALT4:... that a gene variant can both give people the adult i phenotype, a rare blood type, and cause them to be born with cataracts?
- Let me know what you think. I'd also appreciate the input of more experienced medical editors than myself! Igarnish (talk) 02:26, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
- I think ALT3 is actually really good, though if you don't like the "some" wording, you can substitute that for "Japanese and Taiwanese". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, in that case I'm okay with ALT3! I wasn't sure how it would come off but if it sounds good then that's fine :) Igarnish (talk) 01:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. ALT3 is tentatively approved, but as mentioned earlier I'd like to hear a second opinion from a more experienced medicine editor to sign this off. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, in that case I'm okay with ALT3! I wasn't sure how it would come off but if it sounds good then that's fine :) Igarnish (talk) 01:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- I think ALT3 is actually really good, though if you don't like the "some" wording, you can substitute that for "Japanese and Taiwanese". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, Narutolovehinata5! I tried to come up with some alternatives on the topic of ALT0 but I worry they're still imprecise. For context, here's a short excerpt from the paywalled source:
@Igarnish: Fascinating topic! I have a few points. Encyclopedia Britannica is not a reliable medical source; you should use a different source for statements currently attributed to it. Also, "white people" and "black people" are primarily sociocultural descriptors whose meaning varies over countries and time periods, and shouldn't be used in a medical context without further definition. (Again, Encyclopedia Britannica isn't a reliable medical source.) I think the hook would be more interesting as a plain-language description, for example the following. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 03:21, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- ALT5: ... that humans' blood type normally changes from i to I shortly after birth?
- @John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): Oops, I didn't know not to use Encyclopedia Britannica, thanks for letting me know — I've replaced all the references to it with references to review articles or books. I couldn't find another source describing the i1 and i2 variants and have removed that sentence so I suppose that takes care of the "white people"/"black people" problem. I like ALT5! Thanks for your help. Igarnish (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Igarnish: No worries, WP:MEDRS is stricter than the normal guidelines, and learning these things is what DYK is all about. @Narutolovehinata5: Since I suggested the new hook, would you mind approving it? Thanks. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 00:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): I'm willing to approve ALT5 as well, I'd just like some clarification if ALT3's sourcing is fine (since it's sourced to journal articles). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: It looks fine to me. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 02:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- Okay. So ALT5 is cited to a paywalled source so I am AGF here (for what it's worth, the abstract doesn't seem to mention the hook fact). The concern I have right now is that the hook says that the blood type changes "shortly" after birth, but the article instead says that it could be anywhere from 13 to 20 months, so "shortly" doesn't seem to be the right word in this case since the immediate interpretation would be that "shortly" is anywhere from a few hours to maybe at most a week. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- ALT5a: ... that humans' blood type normally changes from i to I within two years after birth? 22:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, that sounds better and more closely matches the article.
ALT3 and ALT5a are now approved, with the choice of hook being left to the promoter. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, that sounds better and more closely matches the article.
- Okay. So ALT5 is cited to a paywalled source so I am AGF here (for what it's worth, the abstract doesn't seem to mention the hook fact). The concern I have right now is that the hook says that the blood type changes "shortly" after birth, but the article instead says that it could be anywhere from 13 to 20 months, so "shortly" doesn't seem to be the right word in this case since the immediate interpretation would be that "shortly" is anywhere from a few hours to maybe at most a week. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: It looks fine to me. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 02:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): I'm willing to approve ALT5 as well, I'd just like some clarification if ALT3's sourcing is fine (since it's sourced to journal articles). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Igarnish: No worries, WP:MEDRS is stricter than the normal guidelines, and learning these things is what DYK is all about. @Narutolovehinata5: Since I suggested the new hook, would you mind approving it? Thanks. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 00:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): Oops, I didn't know not to use Encyclopedia Britannica, thanks for letting me know — I've replaced all the references to it with references to review articles or books. I couldn't find another source describing the i1 and i2 variants and have removed that sentence so I suppose that takes care of the "white people"/"black people" problem. I like ALT5! Thanks for your help. Igarnish (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
