Talk:Genes, Brain and Behavior/GA1

GA Review

Article promoted - 12 July 2014.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch Reviewer: TLSuda (talk · contribs) 18:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC) Greetings! I know you've waited a few months for a review, but I have good news! I'm stuck in a tin can for 5 hours tomorrow late night UTC, so I'm going to use that time wisely to review this article. I expect to have the review posted in the early morning hours UTC the following day. (Approximately less than 36 hours from this post.) I look forward to reading and reviewing this article. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC) Initial review GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria Is it reasonably well written? A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: See Prose review below. B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: Is it factually accurate and verifiable? A. Has an appropriate reference section: B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: C. No original research: Is it broad in its coverage? A. Major aspects: B. Focused: Is it neutral? Fair representation without bias: Is it stable? No edit wars, etc: Does it contain images to illustrate the topic? A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Overall: Pass or Fail: Almost there, see Prose review below. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 16:10, 11 July 2014 (UTC) Prose review In the last sentence in the lead, change the end to: "...for free two years after publication." The second sentence of the Overview and history section. Should end with a period quarterly. The next sentence should start with "As submissions..." Also change "...to an 8-times-a-year one..." to "...to 8-times-a-year..." "All content is available online for free after 24 months." should be changed to "All content is available online for free 24 months after publication." Does any source include the reason why the journal went to online only? If so, this should be included in the article. In the reception section, the journals that cited it the most often, it lists this journal itself. I just want to make sure this is correct, that this journal is one of the top five journals that cites itself. Are the abstracting and indexing and article categories notable or necessary? I don't think either section is encyclopedic, and probably both should be removed. Response Hope this is the correct way to do this, it's my first GA review :-) I have followed all of your suggestions above, except 1, the abstracting/indexing section. This is always included in articles on academic journals because most of those articles derive their notability from the inclusion in selective indexes (see WP:NJournals and WP:JWG). If you like, I could re-format it as a sentence ("Genes, Brain and Behavior is abstracted and indexed in Academic Search and Academic Search Premier, Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS Previews...."), but I think the columns format is clearer. Thanks for your efforts and for the suggestions! --Randykitty (talk) 16:48, 11 July 2014 (UTC) I cannot find a good article that is similar to this one, so I cannot check for sure on the abstracting/indexing. I don't think that is enough of an issue to keep this from passing. That being said, the article has pass its GA review. Congrats!, TLSuda (talk) 04:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)