Talk:Parathyroid gland/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 09:47, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- I propose to review this article and am about to start working through it in detail. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:47, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- Just for a heads up I will be taking a look in the coming days as per request. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 07:50, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
First reading
[edit]Resolved comments from Cwmhiraeth
|
---|
|
Clinical significance, history and other animals
[edit]Resolved issues from Cwmhiraeth
|
---|
|
- I think that the ultra-structure of the chief cells and oxyphil cells should be included. It is interesting to see what the mysterious oxyphil cells look like under the electron microscope. Snowman (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- Please feel free to add this with a reliable source in the 'histology' section; however I do not think not including this should prevent nomination. --LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I took a look and was very happy with the quality of the article. If there are any specific medical questions (Cwmhiraeth please ask me and I will see if I can answer. My only points are two that I will fix myself if this is acceptable. They do not really have to do with the GA review save possibly the first one.
Under the history section I am missing mention of how early thyroidectomy was risk-filled seeing as the surgeons did not know of the parathyroid glands and if these were inadvertently removed they patients would die. I will add from either:
Thanks CFCF, an interesting historical sidenote. Please feel free to add this. --LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)- Not relevant to review -- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 14:07, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- I have a number of images on my computer awaiting cropping and uploading, some of which would be excellent for this article. I will upload these images first.
- -- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 19:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- P.S. Both the above articles are sources of public domain images which I will also upload in the coming days. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 19:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- I've commented in the thread on the talk page so that we don't have multiple duplicate threads. --LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for your input into the article. I look forward to concluding the review within a few days. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:47, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Me too. I've boxed the comments that I feel I have resolved; if they're not, please unbox them and let me know.--LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Ping to Cwmhiraeth. I feel I have addressed your concerns. Is there anything that still needs to be done? --LT910001 (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
- I am proposing to do a final check on all aspects of the article shortly. Have you settled which images are to be used? The formatting of the references is not very consistent and could be improved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- Ping to Cwmhiraeth. I feel I have addressed your concerns. Is there anything that still needs to be done? --LT910001 (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
- Me too. I've boxed the comments that I feel I have resolved; if they're not, please unbox them and let me know.--LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- P.S. Both the above articles are sources of public domain images which I will also upload in the coming days. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 19:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
GA Criteria
[edit]- 1a The article is well written.
- 1b The article conforms with the MOS guidelines with regard to layout and style.
- 2a&b The article is well referenced and has inline citations for all contentious statements.
The formatting of the references lacks consistency. - 2c There is no original research as far as I can see.
- 3a&b The coverage is broad enough and the article does not include irrelevant material.
- 4 The article is neutral.
- 5 The article has been edited by the nominator and other users but there has been no edit warring.
- 6 The images are in the public domain or have suitable licenses.
- 7 The images are relevant to the topic and have suitable captions.
- Overall assessment -
- Thanks, sorry, I will get to this in the coming day or two. --LT910001 (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Right. I've tried to remove the most egregious inconsistencies from the citations. Cwmhiraeth, citations formatted in wiki-stye are not exactly my forte, if you can point out one or two examples of what else needs doing I'll get to it. --LT910001 (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- I made one more change and the referencing now looks better. Well done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:20, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Right. I've tried to remove the most egregious inconsistencies from the citations. Cwmhiraeth, citations formatted in wiki-stye are not exactly my forte, if you can point out one or two examples of what else needs doing I'll get to it. --LT910001 (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)