Talk:Consumption of Tide Pods/GA1
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: Etriusus (talk · contribs) 03:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
This ought to be a fun one, will finish tomorrow. For any issues noted, please use a 
Done, strikethrough or some other means of indicating when an issue has been resolved.
Stability
[edit]- Nothing exciting
Images
[edit]Rights seem to be in order.- For the eternal image, WP:ELNEVER and WP:COPYLINK specify that external images must still be copyright compliant. No info is given for this image.
- Appropriate for the page
Sources
[edit]- No dead links detected on machine search
- Tesema, Martha (December 29, 2017). "I can't believe I have to say this but... please don't eat Tide pods". Mashable. Archived from the original on January 2, 2018. Retrieved January 3, 2018.
- Mashable isn't the best source, what makes its use here reliable?
- This appears to be a message board and a primary source. Try to cut this, maybe an external link instead. Same with the onion source.
- Stop Eating Tide Pods, archived from the original on May 25, 2021, retrieved May 25, 2021
- This is cited to youtube. The citation is incomplete and dubious at best. Is this citation necessary?
Copy-Vios
[edit]Earwig has found a bunch:
- The health risks posed by the ingestion of Tide Pods—particularly by children—have been noted by several media outlets.
- Due to initial reports of children consuming their laundry detergent pods, Procter & Gamble began distributing Tide Pods in opaque tubs and bags.
- Consumer Reports published a story discussing the contents of laundry detergent pods and the consequences of ingesting them, which can include death
- In early 2018, media publications noted that shortly after the product's introduction, the consumption of Tide Pods became a topic of discussion on the Internet. Ultimately, eating Tide Pods became a meme
- In the following years, eating Tide Pods became a popular joke online.
- Following the growth of the meme, YouTube and Facebook started removing (and age-restricting, for YouTube) videos that depicted people eating Tide Pods
- Following the meme's popularization on Twitter and Reddit, many media publications wrote articles discussing the phenomenon, while warning against eating Tide Pods.
- During the first two weeks of 2018, the number of cases of detergent pod ingestion reported to the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) spiked.
Prose
[edit]Lead
[edit]- MOS:LEAD, citations here are unnecessary.
- 'There have been numerous media reports' puffery
- 'The pods have been sold since 2012.' Rather unnecessary this far into the lead, move it to 1st paragraph
- I'm a sucker for infoboxes (Adding one is optional but always encouraged!)
Health Risks
[edit]- This needs to be substantially restructured. The health risks of eating tide pods are not the main focus of the page, but it's featured front and center. Heath risks should be a section below this. Perhaps breaking it down into "Background (what a tide pod is)" "History (Children, dementia, and meme eating)" and "Health Risks" would make the page flow substantially better.
- 'tagged' is this the correct terminology?
- 'eight deaths' dementia patient deaths or deaths in general, unclear
- 'U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer commented on the appeal of pods' when? This throws what was a timeline off
- 'long-chain polymers' (This is 100% my degree talking) what polymers is this referring to? Technically fats and DNA qualify as 'long chain polymers' and the term is rather meaningless on its own.
Internet Meme
[edit]- "The topic of children eating the pods was a concept based on real incidents of children consuming them." this is already implied
Refs
[edit]- "ASTM F3159 -Standard Safety Specification for Liquid Laundry Packets" This is just hanging out at the bottom
Comment: After reviewing the page, there are some rather venial issues. The copy-vios alone are concerning. The page reads like a list of facts rather than flowing like an article; the page needs to be reorganized, frankly. For the time being, I will be Failing the review and I'll kick it back to you for retooling. When the page is ready, I am more than happy to review it again. I tried to give detailed notes on how to improve the page, please ping me if you have any questions or need help. Cheers, Etriusus (Talk) 20:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)