Talk:Norman E. Rosenthal/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 21:31, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   In 1984, Rosenthal pioneered seasonal affective disorder, coined the term SAD, and began studying the use of light therapy as a treatment. this does not read well, perhaps "In 1984, Rosenthal pioneered research into seasonal affective disorder, coined the term SAD, and began studying the use of light therapy as a treatment.

   The lead does not fully summarise the article, please read and apply WP:LEAD.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Sources appear reliable, all significant statements are cited, no evidence of WP:OR.

   Ref #8 is a dead link.

   It would be good to use citation templates to display full details of citations.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Good coverage

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Is there any criticism of his works? This seems to concentrate just on the positives.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Stable

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   One image used, licensed and captioned.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for the above concerns to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

   Thanks for your quick response. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 16:45, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your initial evaluation and suggestions. Today I have:

• Rewrote awkward sentence you cited above.
• Removed dead link and obsolete source which was only a supportive, self published citation anyway.
• Expanded and improved the lead.
• Standardized all citations following the order set out in the citation template
• Added criticism of his research on SAD. I checked every source listed in the article and this was the only criticism I could find -- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)