Talk:2015 Group Project 3

From Embryology

2015 Projects: Three Person Embryos | Ovarian Hyper-stimulation Syndrome | Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome | Male Infertility | Oncofertility | Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis | Students

Links to Project Discussion Pages: Discussion 1 | Discussion 2 | Discussion 3 | Discussion 4 | Discussion 5 | Discussion 6

This is the discussion page for your project.

  • Use this page to discuss online the project with your group members.
  • Paste useful resources here.
  • Remember to use your signature button to identify who you are when adding content here.
  • The following collapsed tables provide starting points for students during project work, you also have tutorials built into practical classes and practice exercises for individual assessmet items.
Group Assessment Criteria  
Mark Hill.jpg Science Student Projects
  1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.
  2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  4. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.
  5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.
  7. Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki.
  8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  9. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.
  10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines.
More Information on Assessment Criteria | Science Student Projects
Uploading Images 
Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Images

The following describes how to upload an image with all the information that must be associated with it.

The image must first be uploaded to the site.

  1. Open the left hand menu item “Toolbox” and click “Upload file” and a new window will open.
  2. Click the button ”Choose file” and navigate to where the image is located on your computer and double click the file.
  3. The window will now show the file name in the “Source filename” window.
  4. You can then rename the uploaded file in the “Destination filename” window.
    1. Make sure the new name accurately describes the image.
  5. Add a description of the image to the “Summary” window. Note the description must include:
    1. An image name as a section heading.
    2. Any further description of what the image shows.
    3. A subsection labeled “Reference” and under this the original image source, appropriate reference and all copyright information.
    4. Finally a template indicating that this is a student image. {{Template:Student Image}}

Images not including the above information will be deleted by the course coordinator and be considered in the student assessment process.

Students cannot delete uploaded images. Contact the course coordinator with the file address.

Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Referencing

All references used in making your project page should be cited where they appear in the text or images.

In page edit mode where XXXX is the PubMed ID number use the following code.

<ref name=”PMIDXXXX”><pubmed>XXXX</pubmed></ref>

For references not listed on PubMed, and text can be inserted between <ref></ref> tags.

Where the reference list will appear make a new section and on a new line the following code. <references/>

Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Copyright Tutorial

Currently all students originally assigned to each group are listed as equal authors/contributors to their project. If you have not contributed the content you had originally agreed to, nor participated in the group work process, then you should contact the course coordinator immediately and either discuss your contribution or request removal from the group author list. Remember that all student online contributions are recorded by date, time and the actual contributed content. A similar email reminder of this information was sent to all current students.

Please note the Universities Policy regarding Plagiarism

"Plagiarism at UNSW is defined as using the words or ideas of others and passing them off as your own." (extract from UNSW statement on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism)

Academic Misconduct carries penalties. If a student is found guilty of academic misconduct, the penalties include warnings, remedial educative action, being failed in an assignment or excluded from the University for two years.

Please also read Copyright Tutorial with regard to content that can be used in your project.

2015 Group Project Topic - Assisted Reproductive Technology
ART in Australia (2012)

Some Potential Topics

  • Your own selected topic (consult coordinator)
  • oocyte quality
  • spermatozoa quality
  • prenatal genetic diagnosis
  • frozen oocytes
  • in vitro oocyte development
  • assisted hatching
  • cryopreserved ovarian tissue
  • oncofertility
  • 3 person embryos
  • fertility drugs
  • Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)
  • ART for genetic disorders
  • male infertility
  • female infertility

Assisted Reproductive Technology

Journal Searches  
Below are shown some easy methods, with examples, for setting up simple searches of PubMed and other Journal databases. In most cases, you simply need to replace the existing term (embryo) where it appears in Wiki code with your own. Note there may also be additional "Advanced search" options available within these sites.

Students - read the paper first before committing to use/cite the material, to ensure you are using the information correctly and in context.

Reference Links: Embryology Textbooks | Journals | Journal Searches | Reference Tutorial | Copyright | For Students | UNSW Online Textbooks | iBooks | Journals | RSS Feeds | Online | Societies | Online Databases | Historic - Textbooks | Pubmed Most Recent | Category:References

Editing Links: Editing Basics | Images | Tables | Referencing | Journal Searches | Copyright | Font Colours | Virtual Slide Permalink | My Preferences | One Page Wiki Card | Printing | Movies | Language Translation | Student Movies | Using OpenOffice | Internet Browsers | Moodle | Navigation/Contribution | Term Link | Short URLs | 2018 Test Student

Please use the following as a guide:

  • Always when citing, identify reviews separately from original research articles.
  • Always identify copyright conditions allow your reuse of content before uploading.
  • If quoting text verbatim always include in "quotation marks" and reference, or additionally identify in brackets after the excerpt.

External Links Notice - The dynamic nature of the internet may mean that some of these listed links may no longer function. If the link no longer works search the web with the link text or name. Links to any external commercial sites are provided for information purposes only and should never be considered an endorsement. UNSW Embryology is provided as an educational resource with no clinical information or commercial affiliation.

Database Example search Wiki code (note - copy text when in Read mode)
Pubmed (all databases) embryo [ ''embryo'']
Pubmed embryo [ ''embryo'']
Pubmed 5 most recent references[1] <pubmed limit=5>embryo</pubmed>
Pubmed Central embryo [ ''embryo'']
Pubmed Central (images) embryo [ ''embryo'']
PLoS (Public Library of Science) embryo [ ''embryo'']
BioMed Central embryo [ ''embryo'']
BMC Developmental Biology embryo [ ''embryo'']
Biology Open (BiO) embryo [ ''embryo'']
About Journal Searches
The following general information is about the above online databases and journals.

External Links Notice - The dynamic nature of the internet may mean that some of these listed links may no longer function. If the link no longer works search the web with the link text or name. Links to any external commercial sites are provided for information purposes only and should never be considered an endorsement. UNSW Embryology is provided as an educational resource with no clinical information or commercial affiliation.

  • PubMed - comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full-text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.
    • PubMed Central (PMC) - is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM).
  • Public Library of Science (PLOS) - is a nonprofit publisher and advocacy organization founded to accelerate progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication.
  • BioMed Central (BMC) - is an STM (Science, Technology and Medicine) publisher of 291 peer-reviewed open access journals.
    • BMC Developmental Biology - is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on the development, growth, differentiation and regeneration of multicellular organisms, including molecular, cellular, tissue, organ and whole organism research.
    • Reproductive Health - is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal focusing on all aspects of human reproduction.
    • Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology (RB&E) - aims to act as a forum for the dissemination of results from excellent research in the reproductive sciences. RB&E represents a global platform for reproductive and developmental biologists, reproductive endocrinologists, immunologists, theriogenologists, infertility specialists, obstetricians, gynecologists, andrologists, urogynecologists, specialists in menopause, reproductive tract oncologists, and reproductive epidemiologists.
  • Biology Open (BiO) - is an online-only Open Access journal that publishes peer-reviewed original research across all aspects of the biological sciences, including cell science, developmental biology and experimental biology.
  1. Note the references appear where the code is pasted and will be updated each time the page is loaded, and may occasionally list articles that do not appear directly related to the search topic.

You can paste this template on your own page for easy reference. This current template is also available as a plain page.


Group 3 Criteria Comment
1 The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described. The project has identified the key topic points.
2 The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area. The overall sub-heading structure is appropriate. There is no history/timeline for this disorder. While there is a map of world infertility, there is no breakdown as to how Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome contributes to these statistics.
3 Content is correctly cited and referenced. Citations and referencing are correctly formatted. Though I cant easily determine/discriminate in the text which are papers are reviews and original research.
4 The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations. Student diagrams included. Some are useful in understanding the topic. There are not a lot of visual elements to your project page, relying heavily on the text.
5 Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities. Includes some current research and findings. The language seems too simplistic in some sections, it was intended to be at university-level students.
6 Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology. Related to embryology (menstrual cycle, endocrine, ovary development, fertilisation).
7 Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki. There is little evidence of group discussion and interaction. Some suggested changes were not incorporated in response to peer feedback.
8 Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement. There is evidence of group discussion and interaction.
9 The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning. The introductory image was eye catching. The video was useful, but it is obvious that you have not explained “Laparoscopic Ovarian drilling” in your own words and how would students know what “insulinated uniupolar needle electrode” meanseven with a typo. This section needed some better work on support information.
10 Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines. Yes generally. Referencing “About PCOS Diet Support” does not appear to scientifically related and I prefer that commercial general public level information not to be included in Wiki projects.


Total Edits - 271 (most edits in October not earlier) Aug to Sept - 90
  • 3460352 - 133
  • 3459224 - 80
  • 3416054 - 29 (13 in October)
  • 3462166 - 28 (21 August 2015‎, 7 October 2015‎) not ongoing contribution.
All 2015 Student Edits 
Group Student Edits
6 5088434 203
1 3251292 180
5 3463890 152
2 3415911 149
3 3460352 133
5 3463667 131
1 3345331 119
1 3292373 109
4 3462297 106
5 5015534 101
6 5020317 94
6 5017878 93
2 3372824 92
2 3374116 82
3 3459224 80
4 3462124 62
4 3463514 39
3 3416054 29
3 3462166 28
4 3462833 8
2 5016784 5
5 5015752 0
This is not an assessment of content or addition/removal.


  • Z3459224 - 3 images
  • Z3460352 - 2 images
  • Z3416054 - 2 images

--Mark Hill (talk) 11:19, 25 September 2015 (AEST) OK so this is far from ready for peer assessment. This is a very large topic with many possible sub-headings (missing from your project page) as well as animal models and environmental/genetic information. I cannot see any illustrations, images, media, resources added to the project page to illustrate the topic and give a balance to the content.

--Z3416054 (talk) 02:07, 27 September 2015 (AEST) Hey guys, where do you think we should include animal models? Also I think it'd be a pretty snazzy idea to have a cartoon/photograph of polycystic ovaries in the intro and then for causes/pathogenesis have a flow chart or something similar

Z3416054 (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2015 (AEST) Hey guys, I've found some pretty snazzy images of polycystic ovaries, but do you know if we have to find the copy right information to be able to use the images? Most of the images come from google-image linked sites and don't really give much information on usage

--Z3459224 (talk) 14:40, 29 September 2015 (AEST) Yeah I'm pretty sure we have to find the copy right information for all our images. I think it would be best if we try to find images on Pubmed first. If not we can use other journal databases.

--Z3416054 (talk) 16:51, 30 September 2015 (AEST) Agreed, I'll get rid of the one I put up as I couldn't really find any copyright information for it. I'll have another browse of pubmed and see what I can find

Z3416054 (talk) 17:35, 30 September 2015 (AEST) I uploaded a new image/flowchart with some proper referencing. I'm thinking that my discussion of pathogenesis will largely be on insulin resistance and hyperandrogenemia

--Z3459224 (talk) 12:24, 2 October 2015 (AEST) That sounds good! If you need any articles, let me know. I came across a few articles on pathogenesis.

--Z3416054 (talk) 14:03, 6 October 2015 (AEDT) Howdy guys! I added an image of some polycysts present on the polycystic ovaries of a rat. It's nothing too amazing, but if you think it's not necessary/appropriate for the section let me know and I can find another pic Sub-headings ]

Peer Asssessment


I'm a little confused as to what your actual topic is? Is it female infertility or polycystic ovarian syndrome? I think it is important to clarify that so as the reader of your page continues reading, they know the exact topic they are reading about. I also think that where you have written “definition” under the big picture of the PCOS ovaries, it should say “epidemiology” as that is more what it sounds like. I also think the picture should be below the information, that way we know a bit better what we’re looking at.

I love the little purple box of information under the “Definition” as it stands out and is pleasing to the eye. The purple boxes throughout the page are really great! The image next to it is also really good as it is clear and relates back to the information beside it. Great use of images! They are all relevant and placed well and the hand drawn image is done well. Your “pathogenesis” section is great as are your sections “diagnosis” and “prevention and treatment”. Detailed and easy to read. It was great to see scientific and animal models throughout the page. Perhaps it would be good to include a little more information linking directly to the literature for more advanced readers. I would also suggest adding a glossary to the bottom of your page, as for people with little to no scientific background who may read this, they may not understand all the words and terms.

It appears under the subheading “environmental factors” that there is no referencing? However, aside from that you have an extensive references list and have referenced correctly and thoroughly throughout the page. I would also suggest adding a bit more information under the heading “causes” aside for the subheading “genetics” as the other sections look a bit bare. The layout is great, easy to read and follow however one suggestion may be to get rid of the underline below your subheadings. It just may make things look a little less clustered and final.

You seem to have covered all the key points pertaining to your topic, however, a section on complications of either PCOS or female infertility may be good to add. Your content and headings are good and references are cited properly. I would suggest perhaps relating it back a bit more to the basics of embryology and discuss what a pregnancy would be a life is a woman with PCOS did get pregnant. Overall, this is a really great page with a good layout that flows well. Keep up the good work!


This project page is nicely organized, and well balanced with graphs, tables, and diagrams. It is wise to narrow down the topic and focus on the female infertility caused by polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. But it will be better if the other possible causes are mentioned at the beginning.

The image ‘ PCOS Ovary vs. Non-PCOS Ovary’ explains the differences between normal and PCOS Ovary very well. It will be better if the image is inserted after the texts which define PCOS as it causes confusion about your topic at the current location.

The use of colour highlighting is very impressive. It do make the important messages stand out.

This Page has correct referencing. Current scientific researches are nicely summarized and fitted into the context. It is impressive to include animal and cell culture models in the pathogenesis section.

Overall, the wiki page has covered the topic well. Contents are concise and easy to understand. It would be better if a ‘glossary’ can be added to explain some of the terminologies for readers.


First and foremost the PCOS Ovary Vs Non-PCOS Ovary hand drawn image is amazing and its placement at the beginning really drew in my attention to the topic. I also particularly liked the purple theme set up throughout the wikipage, I thought it really helped bring the page together.The headings, subheadings and images are all set out neatly making it very presentable and easy to follow. The language used was also very engaging which is always a plus. Content wise there seems to be sufficient information under most of the headings which really showed your efforts and elaborate research on the topic. The only portion that wasn’t particularly well present was the environmental factors. I felt like it needs the inclusion of some examples.

To improve your page I would like to suggest the addition of a glossary that you could use to briefly define some terms such as ‘Hirsutism’ to allow a better understanding of the text. Additionally, I also noticed that under the ‘Hyperandrogenemia’ heading there was the use of the acronyms ‘GnRH’ and ‘LH’. Be sure to express the full term placing the acronym in brackets upon their first appearance before extensive use. I saw that this was done in the following paragraph where LH was initially correctly expressed as Luteinising Hormone but again this should be done at its very first appearance. The page also lacked some history surrounding the origin of the disease and how some of the treatments were established so that could also be included.

Overall, the presentation of the page gave me the impression of a good understanding of the topic so well done guys! Keep up the good work.


Really good introduction! It clearly outlines what is in the page and it serves to summarise the topic and highlight the areas that you will be addressing. It includes in-text citations and I’d like to acknowledge the hand drawn diagram and the efforts taken to do that. Great job. However, it is a bit pixelated so maybe try resizing the image to a smaller size.

This project was done really well. All key points, i.e. “causes”, “Pathogenesis”, “Signs and Symptoms” and etc., were clearly described. In terms of content, this group did a great job. It is very informative and all information they have included are relevant to the topic. There is a great deal of information that is presented in a strong manner with the use of adequate images, tables and diagrams. Images and diagrams can help summaries what some of the paragraphs communicate. For the” Prevention and Treatment”, your table is fantastic as it is informative, concise and relevant to the topic. Use of tables is always beneficial as it makes the page more inviting. Otherwise the page appears to overwhelming with just written content and no visual content to reinforce concepts and information. This was the case for previous groups so well done on that. There is an extensive list of references, which demonstrates, a great effort towards researching your projects system. Only for one of the references which is not from PubMed, you need to put into in the correct format and add the exact date you visited the website.

On the down side, there is an inconsistency in the amount of information throughout the page. Some sections lack information more than others for example you need more information for “Environmental Factors “and “Medications”. Thus, this can be a room for improvement to insure further research is done in those sections. I believe, this is a very large topic with many possible sub-headings so try to come up with more sub-heading. Yes, you mentioned animal models and environmental/genetic information but you need to do more research as these sections must be in more depth and more explanations. Most of the sections have great amount of detail with a number of in text citations and this is great to see. However I do notice that there is no videos what so ever, not sure if you are having trouble finding, or if you have left this until the last thing. Consider some youtube videos. This could help balance the amount of text you have, making the page more interesting. The project could also benefit from having a ‘Glossary’ list so that viewers can understand some uncommon words. A glossary list should be incorporated in a separate subheading. If you are having a plan to add more information to the page, splitting it into bullet points from now on might be a better way of organising it so peers get a more effective learning experience when they read it.

Overall, this is a good project page, well done group and best of wishes!!


Currently, this Wikipage is very impressive through the incorporation of numerous images, and tables. Because this page is mainly focused on PCOS I feel as though you should either remove “Female Infertility” from the title of the page or at least give an overview of other factors that may cause female infertility in the introduction.

The amount of images that have been used in this project page is highly commendable. The hand drawn image in particular, is very simple and clearly demonstrates the morphology of PCOS in comparison to a normal ovary. You have used a variety of diagrams to show various aspects of PCOS thus making the page very intriguing to the reader. Perhaps you could use videos or gifs to further explain diagnostic tools and pathogenesis of the disease.

I am also finding that there are inconsistencies throughout each section of the page. For example, under “Causes” there is a lot of information about genetic factors in comparison to the one line explaining that there are environmental aspects associated with PCOS. Perhaps you could look more into this aetiological factor and “Obesity and Diet” and refer to specific studies that prove this. Again for “Medication”, consider listing a few examples that are known to be an associated risk for PCOS. Also when discussing signs and symptoms of PCOS, you mentioned infertility. Since you stated in the introduction that PCOS is the most common cause of infertility, you should expand more on this mechanism and why it does this.

The layout of the tables and colour scheme is consistent, making it appealing to the reader. However for the “Current Treatments” table, consider adding another column to address the advantages of each. Success rates are provided but further explanation on their benefits would be great. Grouping prevention and current treatments together, it seems as though you forgot to add preventative measures in an obvious way. A few sentences on this should be enough to clearly state this. Also consider putting a glossary as you have used terms such as 'hirsutism', and mentioned hormones GH and LH without initially writing their full names.

Your group has shown extensive research and correct citations for each reference. As a reader of your page, I suggest that more of your research should focus on specific studies to support the content and on topics that are lacking important information such as “New Trials”, “Current Treatments” and “Causes”.

This page has a very good framework and structure. Adding more content, relevant pictures and references will ensure a great final page.


The progress you have made on your project so far is exceptional. Your key points are clearly taught at a peer level and your choice of headings, diagrams and tables so far has been well thought out. I especially commend you on a great drawing in the top of your page. It is drawn clearly and is a great depiction of the uterus and ovaries from the outside and inside and of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. Your introduction and epidemiology is beautifully complemented with the map you have included and the addition of a coloured box to highlight the definition of PCOS as the focus.

It is evident you have conducted wide and extensive significant research that also goes beyond the teaching aspect. This is clear through your inclusion of specific studies, explanation of animal models and cell culture models used in PCOS and the thorough description of your key points due to your extensive research. Well done on using all pubmed articles except for one!

Some suggestions on editing your work would be to briefly mention the cysts in your definition for PCOS since it is a main element of PCOS as depicted in your drawn image at the beginning of your page. The environmental factors are too vague, you could elaborate on this by including examples of environmental factors or explaining why the constant gene pool would indicate environmental factors in the aetiology of PCOS. You could also consider adding an advantages column to your treatment table if it is relevant. Also, while you have provided a great overview of PCOS, maybe also consider adding brief descriptions of other causes of infertility in women since it is your topic area with a focus on PCOS.

Some minor adjustments to make are to remember to add the retrieval date to the website you have used in reference 6. Also, you should increase the size of the map under the definition heading so that the percentages are readable and the country locations more visible and the flow chart under hyperinsulinemia so that it is clearer and the words are more readable by increasing the resolution of your files. The project is coming along great, your thorough effort into the project is evident.


As a first impression, this page is remarkable and provides a very thorough description, explanation and presentation of facts about PCOS. I really like the first image as it immediately caught my eye and demonstrated the differences between an affected ovary and a normal ovary in an easy to understand way. Furthermore the information under the "definition" section was very interesting, however I think maybe re-naming this would be more beneficial because at first I was a little confused about the topic, whether it was focusing more on female infertility or PCOS as a cause of infertility.

Other strengths of this page were the clear and well thought out lay out that allowed easy movement through the page and a logical progression of subheadings. Lastly, the "Pathogenesis" section is exceptionally researched and the range of resources you used highlights the extent and detail of your research- something that you all should be very proud of.

Some areas of improvement include providing more in depth information on some of the sub-headings in the "causes" section including environmental factors, obesity and diet and medication. More information on these areas would really aid in providing a thorough explanation and furthering the readers understanding of the topic. The inclusion of some more visual aids such as a video and maybe even some images or graphs/tabels in the "causes" section to break up the bulk of text. Finally, the inclusion of a glossary at the end of the page would be very useful- especially when considering this page is forwards-facing and can be accessed by the public; some sentences and paragraphs are very dense and use a lot of jargon and terminology that could be further defined in a glossary.

On a light note to end, the little touches such as the bold text throughout the paragraphs highlighting important words and key concepts, as well as the recurrence of the purple colour throughout the page really brought the wiki together and contributed to the flow and overall aesthetic of the page. Overall, you guys have done an awesome job!! Good luck with your final edits!!


Wow! The photo very encapsulate the audience and the topic itself. It is great how you used a lot of visual aids for your page, especially the hand drawn images which is very simple to understand the morphology differences of PCOS a normal ovary. All these visual aids attracts the audiences’ attention. After reading through the majority of the sections, I realised that some content are inconsistent with each other. It is a good idea to proof read all the sections and make sure that all information are integrated cohesively. As for the table under “Current Treatment”, since you have a column for disadvantages, it would be a good idea to add another column comparing it to the advantages.

I have also realised that you guys have not added a glossary; it is very beneficial for the audience as some might not have been introduced to scientific names. Make sure you write their full names then have the abbreviations in brackets to introduce a new term. [Luteinising Hormone (LH)]

There were a few grammatical and spelling errors; for example under “Blood Test” you have mentioned ‘Thyroid Stimulating Hormone’ however you have named it LSH. Shouldn’t it be “TSH”? It is important to proof read and ensure that the information is consistent. It would be great to see more images supporting “Gynecologic ultrasonography” and “magnetic resonance imaging”. The amount of resources found shows that extensive literature research have been conducted. All the references were also cited correctly.

This page has an excellent structure, by adding more detailed diagrams, content and references will improve the page even more!


The website appears very well researched and covers all important points relating to the topic PCOS. Thus, it might be reasonable to change the topic of the entire page to PCOS and not female infertility, as that does not seem to be the real focus of the website. Otherwise, this might seem a little confusing to readers. In addition, maybe try to relate the topic to ART.

The website has many useful images, diagrams, and tables, which are useful for the understanding and illustration of the written content. The self-drawn image is a very good anatomical illustration. Nevertheless, there are many references and a lot of information to be found on the website and inclusions such as the animal models, etc. really go in depth of the topic.

The headings and subheadings are all in a logical order and cover all relevant aspects of the topic. Content wise, it might be good to look into the causes again and see if there is any additional information on the environmental factors, obesity and diet, and medication, as these are comparatively short. Also, the definition heading could probably be labelled epidemiology.

The display of the treatment options is really great and highlights all important information. In general the page does very well on highlighting important features (purple highlights). Maybe add some more of these to be more consistent.

Overall, the referencing is very good. Only the environmental factor subheading has no reference yet and the referencing of the Ultrasound of Polycystic Ovaries image is not according to Mark’s guidelines (only the PMID is shown, not the actual name of the paper,authors).


This is a really good wiki page. The key points for polycystic ovarian syndrome are well described. The animal and cell culture models are pretty impressive. The use of images and tables make the page easy to read. The Hand drawn image is especially awesome. It explained the difference between PCOS Ovary and Non-PCOS Ovary really well. The purple highlighting is another highlight of this wiki page and the key information thus is really eye catching. Moreover, the references and citations are correct and appropriate. The page layout is neat and easy to follow. Some suggestions for your work would be:

1. The topic of the wiki page can be defined more specifically: whether it is female infertility or just polycystic ovarian syndrome.

2. A glossary at the end of page will help those without background knowledge understanding the topic easier.

3. The full term for the acronym ‘LH’ is described in the Animal Models under heading ‘Hyperandrogenism’. However, the acronym ‘LH’ is firstly used under the ‘Hyperandrogenemia’ heading. The full term should be explained at the first place. Moreover, the acronym ‘GnRH’ and ‘FSH’ are not explained.

4. Some sections can be described more detailed such as ‘Environmental Factors’ which just contains one sentence.

Overall, this is an excellent page. Good Luck!


Straight away I was impressed by the images and the table of contents. It appears that all subheadings are relevant and well planned. Having the definition in the introduction was great as well as the addition of epidemiology including the map, however I think it would be much more informative for readers if you touched on the variety of topics your wikipage will be covering (if they did not bother to read the table of contents)

The variety of causes which are mentioned for Female infertility was concise and very informative under their respective sub-subheadings and with the appropriate referencing. There is a substantial amount of information provided under the ‘Pathogenesis’ section which clearly defines the different types, however, it seems that rather than Female infertility you have focused more information on ‘PCOS’ rather than all round? The images added in this heading was great in breaking up the text and the addition of animal and cell culture models were a really nice addition

The signs and symptoms section is nice and simple while giving the reader all the necessary information without lines and lines of text which makes the information easy to access however in a section of ‘Diagnosis’, I think use of paragraphing may help the reader take rests to understand the large amount of information provided in the blood testing, maybe make use of a glossary for the bolded words. Other than that the image has been reference properly and the subheadings were helpful

The tabulated information in Prevention and Treatment was a great way to avoid walls and walls of text as some of the other groups have done clearly identifying the cons of certain ‘current’ treatment methods. The amount of references that went into making this wikipage is a clear indication of how much effort was put in to making this page what it is

Great job on the project so far!! Only thing I can say is to try look for a video regarding Female infertility!! Good luck!


Overall layout is very well organised, covering multiple important aspects. All supplied headings have a sufficient amount of information regarding the sub topic. The project begins with a hand draw diagram, includes a map of prevalence of primary infertility, flow chart, histological slides, ultrasounds, and tables showing current treatments and their disadvantages. These all contribute to making the project easier to follow and read, their topic is very clear and doesn’t go in different directions, instead follows one path.

Up to 40 references and many citations were included which shows that the group did further research, however the downside to the project is there is room for more information, creating headings such as complications and glossary, the glossary section would do the reader a world of good to look back at words they haven’t heard of before.

A main positive out of this project is the heading followed by subheadings which all have a deep understanding of information included, it isn’t just empty spaces. The group authors should get together and research other topics they can included because the more vital information the better understanding the reader would have of the topic.


I found this Wikipedia page particularly interesting. A wide assortment of visual media including histological slides, ultrasound images, geographical maps, tables, flow diagrams and hand-drawn images, all add a richness and balance to the text. This page does well to direct the reader's attention with highlighted text as well, to make for an aesthetically pleasing article. In particular, i found the hand-drawn diagram particularly intelligent and impressive.

In terms of text, i think this article is of adequate complexity and provides educational value to its intended audience of fellow university students. However, more diagrams to accompany the pathophysiological mechanisms and simplify the process may be of benefit. The text under 'Causes' is informative, but there is an imbalance of information for the various subsections within that heading. I assume, you intend to elaborate on those subsections that seem a little thin. It may be more effective to break up the 'genetic factors' section to a simple list of genetic influences, with details of studies relevant to that factor alongside it. This way, you don't have to read through several paragraphs to get to a particular gene/information point. Also, some arrows pointing to the actual cysts explicitly in the histological slide may be useful, as already done in the Ultrasound slide.

Finally, although the Wikipedia page is organised logically and contains particularly relevant sections, it may do with some more. As an age old issue, I'm interested in the epidemiology of PCOS and a bit about its history (or where/when we know what we do about it). Other than that, the page looks pretty good and reads well too.


This is really good and basically finished, Images are relevant and informative, then drawn image is especially great. Flow and headings are spot on, nice table. Realy professional. Not a huge amount to say on this one just a bit of housework to do before you publish. Make sure any factual statements you have are refrenced Id move the first image of the FRS so your not leading in with it. Drop the Definition subheading and just make in your introduction section. Makes it more wiki like. For a style guide have a look at the wiki page Taking the underline from under the subheading will make it read nicer, but then I have a person hate of underlines. You could add an epidemiology section to move to world map to and there’s lots information you could put in such a section. Your image under pathogenesis is word wrapped to the left. I would change that to in line or word wrap to the right. Given the detail of the image I would suggest in line. Likewise with your rat specimen image bring it down under the heading. If you put it in its own box you could add some details about what we’re looking at in the image. Topics like Environmental factors could use some more detail. Although I know were all still working on our pages. Make sure to hyperlink unusual words or other topics mentioned to the sites glossary or pages for that lost clicking through wiki effect. Apart from that another top notch page, great detail, really interesting and direct. Fantastic work guys.


This page initially gives an amazing first impression with the hand drawn image of the ovary – the text in the introduction is clear, succinct and very effectively lets readers know what the topic is about – and what that topic is. It does a good job at enticing the reader to continue on reading for the rest of the page.

Particularly for the introduction and generally on the whole page, the use of text is clear, not too dense and easy to understand. That is a really beneficial element to have on a clearly complicated topic and makes the topic interesting to read even for people who do not have training in that field.

After the introduction section of the page, the text howver can become a bit crowded - this could be broken up through the use of more media files. Particular in the ‘causes’ section – something could be added there to break up the page. I would also recommend using media files other then images. Adding smething such as videos, animations or gifs would really add to the level of the page and make it much more interesting.

I would also suggest that more information needs to be added to the ‘current treatments’ section. Not sure if this is quite complete yet, but this is quite a dramatic and important element of the topic, and the information currently present does not really delve into enough detail. A glossary added to the page would also add to its cohesiveness.

Otherwise a really good page that has had a lot of work put into it – and it can be seen!


This is a sound wiki page that is well researched , and cited(for the most part), you have great use of tables, images purple highlighting and what an awesome hand drawn image. The overall presentation of you web page is cohesive and uniform throughout. As PCOS seems to be the primary focus of this project, you may wish to rethink the heading of the page, it should state the key topic of your research. Is it a Definition or an introduction? It does not actually stats plainly and simply what PCOS is. your content is relevant and well structured but need more of a link to epidemiology perhaps via links made to infertility, ART, IVF or PDG used to combat PCOS. Perhaps consider the introduction of a historical context heading and a background information heading to provide further information about the ovaries and uterus befoe launching into the content of PCOS- see group 4 male infertility Background information.

The images that you have selected and used are excellent and I would also suggest that you rethink your placement of the beautiful hand drawn image, perhaps to heading where it relates to the content, the use of the map under the " definition" is sufficient. Also you may wish to rethink the size of some of your images especially the hyperinsulinemia and hyperandrogenemia flowchart.

The causes sub- heading required more content and more specifically the environmental factors heading , ensure that it is correctly referenced. the majority of your referencing is spot on , there are only a few amendments that need to be made review reference number 6 and the citation of the Ultrasound of Polycystic Ovaries image.

The use of tables and dot points to highlight key points is fantastic, all tables are uniform and present the information well. I really like the current treatment table and would recommend keeping the format with the addition of an advantages column. Your page would also greatly benefit from a current research heading instead of new trials heading as well as a glossary. Be mindful to review your own and each other's work for grammatical and spelling errors. Great work so far guys, the layout of your page is awesome and you images so far are phenomenal.