Talk:Golgi apparatus/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: —Mike moral ♪♫ 22:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

In the lead section, I would say that there should be a reference in the third sentence ("The primary function...").

All facts in the lead should also be in the main part of the article. So refs should not be needed here. Removing the absolute emphasis because not essential. --Ettrig (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In "Structure," the sentence "Each cisterna comprises..." should have a citation as well as the sentence "The cisternae also carry structural..."

Added ref for the first one. --Ettrig (talk) 21:21, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since the talk page says it is written in British English, you should check for American English.
The first two paragraphs of "Function" could use some citations.
The first paragraph and the table of "Vesicular transport."
The section "Transport mechanism" could do without the bullet points. I tend to prefer prose, but it would be perfectly fine without it.
The "Golgi apparatus during mitosis" seems a bit out of place. Could you possibly find another spot for it or add to it?
There is a ^{[citation needed]} in the "Golgi apparatus in popular culture" section.
Overall, this a good article, but per 2a of the GA criteria, it need more references for verifiability. I'll put the article on hold for now.

—Mike moral ♪♫ 18:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The review has made little progress in two months. Is it going to be finished soon? GA reviews aren't meant to go on for months on end. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of time has passed, and sufficient changes have not been made, so I'm failing this good article nomination. —Mike moral ♪♫ 06:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]