Talk:Malaria/GA3
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: LT910001 (talk · contribs) 23:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'll take this review. I haven't had any part in editing or creating this article. Any other editors are welcome to contribute. LT90001 (talk) 23:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- Note. I've noticed that there are a lot of malaria-related articles and it's quite hard to navigate. I've just created and added Template:Malaria to this page and other relevant pages in this regard, but I haven't made any other edits to the page. LT90001 (talk) 00:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Overall this should be a quick and easy pass.
GA summary
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
Yes. Minor fixes suggested below, but nothing preventing promotion. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
Yes. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
For the most part. One or two uncited sections and an image I have mentioned below. | |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
See above. | |
2c. it contains no original research. |
See above. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
Certainly. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
Yes | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
Yes | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
Yes | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. |
Checked. One or two flags (noted below) but nothing preventing nomination. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. |
Very relevant. | |
7. Overall assessment. |
An excellent article. |
Specific Comments
Lede, Signs & symptoms Done
|
---|
|
Complications
- Sentence "Possible causes include ... severe anaemia. " is very technical and inconsistent with the easy-to-read language of the rest of the article. Suggest reword.
- Cerebral malaria is mentioned in both complications and signs and symptoms sections.
Lifecycle
- The first half is very easy to read, the second half is difficult to follow.
- Suggest first instance of "merozoite" be wikilinked.
- Suggest new paragraph here: "Other merozoites develop into immature gametes" and then reword like the first half. This part is difficult to follow! (In fact I would go so far to say, the first half is one of the better representations of the malaria lifecycle I've read, so I'd love if the second half was that clear and easy to read)
- Recurrent malaria: bracketed term not needed here: "reappear (recur) "
- Pathophysiology
- One of the characteristic features of malaria infection, which you have mentioned earlier, is the reliability of the tertian and quaternian fever cycles. The putative mechanism for this should be mentioned.
- This paragraph "Although the red blood cell surface adhesive proteins " is quite specific and I'm not sure what the relevance is. Suggest move to biology section?
Genetic Resistance
Genetic Resistance Done
|
---|
|
Diagnosis
- "Approximately 30% of people ". This group is unspecified. Do you mean "people infected in the last (week)"?
- "the presentation" -> "of symptoms"
- "which might be elicited by any of the following: ... peripheral blood leukocyte count.[3]" is quite technical and medical. Suggest reword.
- Classification section is out of place; suggest this list be transferred to a table and moved up to the 'signs and symptoms' section.
Prevention
- Should 'vector control' mention the use of spraying mosquito-infected swamps? I believe this was one of the key reasons that the Americas, in particular North America, controlled the spread of malaria.
- It used to be in the article, but was removed as it is a (mostly) historical method for mosquito control. This information can be found in the history daughter article, and in mosquito control. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- This paragraph "Methods used to prevent malaria include medications, ... it could become re-established if conditions revert to a combination that favours the parasite's reproduction.[42]"
- Does not seem to be supported by the source
- This paragraph "Methods used to prevent malaria include medications, ... it could become re-established if conditions revert to a combination that favours the parasite's reproduction.[42]"
- "favours" is not consistent with the use of American English.
- Source mentions difficulty in removing from low population-density areas.
- Suggest add "high anopheles mosquito population density" to make clear this is not all mosquitoes.
- In conclusion, needs a re-write
Medications
Medications Done
|
---|
|
Prognosis, Epidemiology, History
Prognosis, Epidemiology, History Done
|
---|
Epidemiology
History
Economic impact
|
Images
- Some possible copyright flags on images, eg File:Ronald_Ross.jpg and File:Artemisia annua West Virginia.jpg, but one must assume good faith.
- File:Malaria_fever.svg this image has no citations so cannot be verified and/or is OR.
- It would be nice, but is certainly not a requirement of the GA review, if File:5901 lores.jpg could be replaced with a clearer image.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would say this article is of very good quality. Kind regards, LT90001 (talk) 11:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- Question
- LT90001, how many sources have you checked to make sure they are verified? Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 17:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- See here, for example. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 17:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your attention. On every review, as well as completing a survey of all the sources used as they are reported in the article, I check as reading the summaries of about 1/3-1/4 of all citations, paying particular attention to assertions or contentious statements. If the abstracts do not support the text, then I seek a full text article and the relevant section. LT90001 (talk) 02:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
With the changes that have been made, I would be happy to promote this article to GA status at this time, but will wait several days in the hope that the few remaining quality-based concerns are addressed. LT910001 (talk) 09:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
I find this article to match the GARC in being well-written and broad, neutral and well-sourced, and without any outstanding issues. I have updated the table above and will make the required changes to promote to GA status shortly. Well done, thanks for bringing this article back up to GA standards, and I wish you well on your wiki-travels. LT910001 (talk) 01:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)