Talk:Variants of SARS-CoV-2/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 23:20, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-fail: There's a tag in "Overview" section about the need for more medical references/fewer primary sources. You'll definitely need to work on that before the page can become a GA. I also worry about neutrality when it has section titles of "Notability criteria" (we shouldn't treat this like requirements for warranting an article in the first place) and the blatantly biased descriptions of "Notable missense mutations" and "Other notable variants". Above all else, it comes off as a "I'm going to cherry-pick because I only think certain variants matter" stance. Keep opinions on the variants to yourself as they don't belong in tables, prose, or the names of sections. On another note, try not to have super-short paragraphs (particularly ones consisting of just a sentence or two) as they make the flow of text feel choppy. See the aforementions sections as well as "Variants of interest (WHO)" for examples of this. Either expand the paragraphs or merge them to form larger ones. As for the date formats, they should be consistent whether it's MDY or DMY per MOS:DATE, so you'll have to adjust the tables to match that. Better luck next time! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:20, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]