Talk:Environmental burden of disease

this is not an advertising subject. it is a course i took as Ph.D requirement. it is purely a scientific subject, and as you can see from the references that world health organization (WHO)is highly concerned with this subject. when i collected the material of this subject for Ph.D course i notice that wikipedia does not have such a subject, so i find it a good idea to post the subject to your wikipedia, for general benefits. with best regards (comment added 18:03, February 14, 2011 by User:Eham.ajlouni )

Advice

I see this is a much more extensive article than Disease burden, so the A10 criterion for deletion does not apply. Probably the two articles should me merged, though I am not sure which of the two titles would be best--the other can be turned into a Redirect.

But the material here needs considerable work before it will be a proper Wikipedia article. (that's the meaning of the tag"Wikify" I added to the top of the article).

1. Wikipedia articles are descriptive, unlike an essay, which is normally intended to present an argument. Wikipedia articles present the facts, give the interpretations others have published, but they come to no conclusions. If there is a range of opinions about the interpretation or implication, they must include them all, with appropriate references. The article should probably rely more on other sources than the WHO--we generally prefer published books or articles as sources if available, rather than relying extensively on reports.
2. The Wikipedia style is impersonal, and avoids adjectives when possible. If there are a range of numbers to be presented, in includes them, instead of giving an overall summary. It tries to be as brief as possible, avoiding rhetoric.
3. There are various ways of presenting references that are in use here--see WP:CITE. Your format is acceptable, but it requires manual editing of the numbering when the text is changed. This is no problem when writing an essay, because when the essay is completed the text does not change. But for a Wikipedia article, people can -- and certainly will -- modify the article in minor and major ways indefinitely, & there is never a final text. Therefore, it is better to use our standard footnote system for automatic numbering. One easy way is to enable "ProveIt" on the gadget page in your user preferences.
4. Wikipedia is hypertext: we add links to other articles that will help users understand the context. (see WP:LINK - don't link every word, but link the words that someone might want to follow up for an explanation ,especially of any technical terms used. Link them only the first time they appear in the article. After you have done that, add back links in related articles to refer to your article. (in particular, do this from the relevant part of the articles on Canada and the Netherlands.
5. We have an automatic numbering system for lists -- see Help:List. It makes formatting them a good deal easier. But usually it's better to write in prose than an outline format.
6. We have an automatic system for line breaks also. Instead of a <br /> tag, just leave an extra line.
7. I adjusted the style of your sections to our format.
8. I am not at all sure that the Methodology section belongs in the article. We don't normally give people instructions, even in outline, though we do have to give them some indication of how the data is obtained. It might be better condensed into something like the steps that are taken, rather than instructions for taking them.

FGood luck with it, and I'll be happy to advise you further. DGG ( talk ) 20:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)