Wikipedia:Peer review/Herpes simplex/archive1

Herpes simplex

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… We just got herpes simplex up to GA level, but it will need a good bit of work to progress to FA - and it's a topic that the general public find very interesting for obvious reasons! This article, therefore, should really be comprehensive to non-experts so please give comments on where things are not easy to follow. I would also like reviewers to give an idea of what they think is missing from the article, and how to improve on existing material. Things that I have noticed in other good virus articles include history sections, for instance.

Grateful for any feedback, big thanks, ~ Ciar ~ _{(Talk to me!)} 07:07, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Peripitus

Just a few comments on what is a well written and apparently comprehensive article.

Broad bits

• Personally I don't like references in the lead - they often show that there is unique material there rather than simply summarising the rest of the article. Please consider moving the reference into the place with the same information in the body.
• The article is too long at 102K, also resulting in a very long table-of-contents. At the least the Epidemiology section should be a separate article called Epidemiology of herpes simplex with a referenced summary left behind.
• There is inconsistency in the reference formatting. eg: ref#130-134, 136-137 are bare weblinks, 138 has a template error.
• I can't see anything in the article on the scientific progression of knowledge, leading to the current stage of affairs. Cannot see anything on when and how it was identified as linked with the virus. See eg: Acute_myeloid_leukemia#History
• Should the heading Recurrences and triggers be Recurrence and triggers ?
• a few words explaining what a primary infection is would be pertinent at the first use (unless it is there and I missed it)
• I'd drop the whole Legal redress section. I feel it doesn't add anything useful to the article and, given the source of the references, it is likely not a world-wide position but is rather US-centric.

Specific issues

From reading through a few random sections

• In the Disorders section the statement "...although recent years are seeing an increase in oral HSV-2 infections." is vague and dates fast. It's preferable to have something more concrete like "...although oral HSV-2 infection rates increased by <x>% in the last <y> years of the 20th Century".
• There is some redundancy - eg: in the Disorders section , including fever, and sore throat, and painful ulcers may appear - appears to say the same thing more concisely. Rare occasions of reinfections occur inside the mouth - again appears to say the same thing. Oral herpes is spread by direct contact with an active sore in an infected person, for instance, during kissing -> Oral herpes is spread by direct contact with an infected person's active sores, for instance during kissing.
• HSV-2 is the most common cause of recurrent viral meningitis called Mollaret's meningitis - should this have the words "a type of" inserted after "of" unless this is the only type of viral meningitis.
• In the Bell's palsy section, first section needs a comma, possibly just after "nerves of the face".
• The penultimate sentence and its predecessor in the "Orofacial infection" section) contradict each other. try Oral herpes is usually spread by direct contact
• In the "Natural compounds" section, However, there is currently insufficient scientific and clinical evidence "However" is not needed and "currently" adds nothing unless there is a date noting when this refers to. Please look for all uses of the word "currently" and rewrite to either remove the word or add a date/year.
• In the "Antiviral medication" section the sentence with by interfering with viral replication, effectively slowing the replication rate needs some work. It is unclear from the writing whether the drugs work by in effect slowing the replication or are effective at the slowing. If it's the "in effect" one then the word "effectively" can be removed.
• Same section. There are several prescription antiviral medications for controlling herpes simplex outbreaks.... Are they prescription drugs worldwide or just in the US ? Please check through the treatment section as many parts are written from a US perspective and need consideration as to whether the information is applicable worldwide.

- Peripitus (Talk) 11:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)