Timeline of tuberous sclerosis is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on May 5, 2014. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured list |
This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
One problem with any timeline of key events is deciding what to include. Unless some objective and obvious criteria can be established, then the decision will be subjective and count as original research if made by an editor. To solve this, I've drawn on the few timelines already in print:
All the key events in this timeline are present on those two timelines with the following exceptions:
Colin° Talk 17:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
There doesn't seem to be any one style for writing a detailed timeline on Wikipedia. Medical papers have their own distinctive style for summarising the history of a subject. The terse "Surname (Year) discovered xyz" style is dry and uninformative. Where possible I've added the nationality, location, full name and occupation. I've tried not to single-out the lead author if the team is large. Colin° Talk 17:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
The following entries are listed by Rott (2005) in his history. However, there doesn't seem to be much that is historically significant.
1993 Fernández-González et al. Lung transplant. (A letter to the journal. Does it suggest or report on a case?)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) as cited in Rott (2005)1997 Wendy Spangler and colleagues reported a case of a 5-year old boy with TSC who died after developing a cerebral aneurysm. Cerebrovascular complications are considered rare with TSC.
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) as cited in Rott (2005)2002 A team from the Epilepsy Centre Bethel at Bielefeld in Germany reported on 8 patients with TSC who underwent epilepsy surgery to remove the leading epileptogenic tuber. Seizure outcome was good in all patients, with two becoming seizure free. The authors encouraged surgery at an early age in this patient group.
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) as cited in Rott (2005)</ref>The current sections are:
A recent change (reverted) was to:
I thing that grouping had some flaws:
I don't claim the current section grouping is perfect. Can we improve it? Colin° Talk 08:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Tony has suggested that "19th century" is preferable to "Nineteenth century". I'll make this change. Colin° Talk 16:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
The 1975 entry
- 1975
- Riemann used kidney ultrasound in the case of a 35-year-old woman with chronic renal failure and TSC.[45]
seems a bit lacking in context—could a little more be added? E.g., what exactly was notable here—the description of renal failure or the use of ultrasound in identifying it? (Sorry Colin, but I just had to ask :) Fvasconcellos ( t· c) 16:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
It is not a big deal, and I totally support the article, you've done a great job. But one place I find that past tense reads oddly is in reference to the layout of book. For example: "It contained 22 large coloured plates with 400 figures presented in a systematic order. On page 20, fig. 1 was a drawing that is regarded as the earliest description of tuberous sclerosis." Surely if I were to pick up a copy of this book today it would still contain 22 large colored plates and the drawing regarded as the earliest description. The use of past tense in this case makes it sound as if the layout of the book is transient. Hm?-- DO11.10 01:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm still reads a bit oddly to me, rewording the passage to avoid assigning any tense to the layout may be better. Something like:
French dermatologist Pierre François Olive Rayer published an atlas of skin diseases containing 22 large coloured plates with 400 figures presented in a systematic order. Figure 1 on page 20, a drawing entitled "végétations vasculaires", is regarded as the earliest description of tuberous sclerosis. Here Rayer noted these were "small vascular, of papulous appearance, widespread growths distributed on the nose and around the mouth".
This puts the tense squarely (I think) on the words "published" and "regarded", and would keep the verb tense consistent. Just a suggestion it's up to you.-- DO11.10 17:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm (also). Still thinking about this one. The book "was" and "is". While the above neatly sidesteps the issue of tense in a couple of places, it (1) makes the first sentence a little long (though a comma before "presented" might help) and (2) separates the "végétations vasculaires" from the "these were small ...". Colin° Talk 20:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Timeline of tuberous sclerosis. 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) 19:14, 6 October 2017 (UTC)