Talk:Adverse reaction to cytokines

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Cytokine#Effects]] The anchor (#Effects) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Article categorization[edit]

This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article name and catgeroisation makes as much sense like creating adverse effects of hormones and putting it into dermatology. Richiez (talk) 10:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Merge[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge. --BDD (talk) 17:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like it would belong better at Cytokine, as per WP:MERGE, and per WP:NOTDICDEF. ~Sp K 22:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose - I would like to keep this topic separate as it is usually covered independently in most dermatology texts. ---kilbad (talk) 05:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - this topic does not seem to have enough "meat" to stand alone at present. It could be merged into cytokine for the present -- say in a "therapeutic use" section if it is about injected cytokines, or together with an intro to cytokine storm, for example, if it concerns natural cytokines (it's not very clear which source of cytokines the page means). Then, if the section grows substantially, perhaps it could be budded back out.~ Ciar ~ _(Talk) 18:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My vote is delete the adverse reactions article, it is completely unclear what it is supposed to mean. The adverse reactions need to be described in the IFN, EPO, LIF and other articles, they have very little in common anyway. Richiez (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support When it goes big enough one can split it off. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-merge I don't think it needs to be an article on it's own, as it only consists of one sentence. It is a very broad topic and not only necessary for dermatology, but more of a general immunological context. I would suggest making it a heading in the cytokines article, however towards the end of the article. Then people can add various conditions and disease states eg dermatology related. Cytokine storms? If it does start to take up alot of the article then maybe we can make it a stand alone article again. Aqua112233 (talk) 07:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Wikipedia is not supposed to be a comprehensive textbook on every subject. I would think you need a different angle, different title, and a lot more information to justify a separate article. Tom Hulse (talk) 06:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Material and classification[edit]

There is some material around, PMID 8638283, Cytokine storm, TGN1412 but it does not at all fit into the dermatology related category. Richiez (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]