Jump to content

Talk:American Anthropometric Society/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion 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.


GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 19:22, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

The article is remarkably improved from its stubby state for many years, good work!

Lead

[edit]
  • Admirably clear, good writing.

History

[edit]
  • "approximately 50" and "only two dozen" don't tally. Needs a word of explanation.

Analysis of brains

[edit]
  • Edward Anthony Spitzka, M.D., professor of anatomy at Jefferson Medical College, published a paper on his study of six brains - please drop the glosses, they aren't helpful to the reader. Suggest "Edward A. Spitzka published a paper on six brains" is all that's needed here.
  • "They observed no significant differences in his brain" - differences from what?
    • Changed to "they observed no unusual characteristics in the surface of his brain" and "no significant differences were observed between his brain and those of less eminent persons" Dwkaminski (talk) 14:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Walt Whitman's brain

[edit]
  • This section stands out as a bit of fun, a bit of gossip, and I'm afraid a bit of a WP:COATRACK, a diversion which might be somewhat relevant to Walt Whitman (but gossipy even there), and somewhat more, perhaps to Frankenstein (1931 film), but not very much to this article. I suggest we cut it down to a single short paragraph within the 'Analysis of brains' section; the current section occupies about a third of the main text (not counting lead and refs), which is clearly WP:UNDUE in this context, a serious institution.

Notable donors

[edit]

References

[edit]
  • All the sources are clearly relevant and verify the claims made of them.

Images

[edit]
  • The only image is of the Wistar institute, from Commons. It seems to be a valid user-created CC-by-SA image.

Summary

[edit]

Well, that's about it from me, just a few comments which I hope will be quick to fix. Good work and I look forward to seeing this at GA soon. It would be helpful if you could mark "Done" or something after each item so I can see when you feel you've addressed the comments. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:52, 5 January 2024 (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.