Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Aortic dissection/archive1

Aortic dissection

I feel that it is ready now. Commons has no more images in this topic, every section is full, it is well organized, meets all of the featured article criterias. NCurse_work 14:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for the moment. Main reason is WP:CITE - although the statements about diagnosis and treatment are common knowledge, I'd like to see them sourced to reliable sources (e.g. sensitivity and specificity of an arm blood pressure difference). Syphilis is not mentioned as a cause. DeBakey III has 3 subtypes. Regret not having taken the time to work more on this one. JFW | T@lk 15:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The intro is too short and the article does not have any inline citations. -- Underneath-it-All 16:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Has three. NCurse_work 16:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think it would be better to submit this article to peer review as it is currently the medicine collaboration of the week and we could improve the article using the comments from peer review. Subsequently this could be a featured article. --WS 16:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do as you wish. I help if needed. NCurse_work 16:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose lack any stability (e.g. currect collaboration) and has barely any citation (see Cystic fibrosis or crohn's disease...) Circeus 21:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]