Talk:Progeroid syndromes/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Canada Hky (talk · contribs) 21:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be working on this over the next few days. I will post some general comments as I go, and then sum everything up with a formal review / checklist. Canada Hky (talk) 21:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General comments (Broad strokes)

This is a really interesting article, and does a good job of introducing the concept of premature aging syndromes. I am going to make all my comments below, not all of them may be strictly necessary for GA status, but I think will improve the article.

I would add a picture to the lead. Probably the best choice would be the image for progeria, as it would likely be a visual indicator to people that they reached the right page.
I reviewed the peer review, and I notice one of the things you asked for was advice on whether the article was within reach for a more general audience. I think this needs some work, and here are some suggestions:
- Rather than the existing sections 1 + 2 of the page, I would suggest a section called "Pathophysiology of progeroid syndromes" with a general introduction (probably can be covered in a single paragraph) and then subsections for DNA repair and Lamin. I would introduce the general mechanisms there.
- Maybe introduce the specific diseases in a second section called "Progeroid syndromes". The article isn't tremendously fragmented, so I think each of them could be introduced there with a quick note about the responsible mechanism in the first sentence or two.
  - The disease sections are quite long for this overview article. The section on trichothiodystrophy is considerably longer than the standalone page for the disease.
The large Lamin image might not be well suited for an introduction to the overall group of diseases.
I don't think the AR image adds anything to the article.
Rather than the "Main article" links for each disease, why not just link to the page in the first sentence when you mention the name?
There are a significant number of primary sources in use. There should be one or two good reviews + OMIM + Gene Reviews that would have all the material necessary for an overview article like this.

There are some more specific examples, but these broad strokes are probably easier to mention. I haven't checked the sources extensively, however is there a specific source you have been using to lump all of these in as "progeroid syndromes"? It should be cited somewhere. Canada Hky (talk) 02:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know I've said before I will address these issues when I have time, but I never really had the time. But I promise I will make these changes after I've done my last ever piece of assessed work, which is due in next week. Thank you for your comments, I really do appreciate it. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 02:35, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I'll keep at the review process, and when you have time I would like to see what you make of my suggestions. Canada Hky (talk) 02:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has been over a month since the above exchange, no edits have been made to the article, and aside from one redirect creation on June 18, Kinkreet hasn't edited on Wikipedia for three weeks. If there isn't action on this GAN in the near future, perhaps it should be closed. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing review

There has been no action since my last post over three weeks ago; further, neither nominator nor reviewer has edited on Wikipedia since mid-June. This review has clearly been abandoned by both parties, so I'm closing it now; the article is not listed. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:34, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]