Talk:Neurocysticercosis/GA1

Latest comment: 2 hours ago by DoctorWhoFan91 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Nominator: IntentionallyDense (talk · contribs) 23:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 22:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply


I'll take thie one, expect initial remarks in 48-72 hours. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 22:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good! I know medical pages can be confusing for some so if you have any questions let me know or ask WP:MED! IntentionallyDense (talk) 00:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Btw, seeing that you are taking part in the GAN backlog drive(and easily leading too, great work, congrats!), would you like to review one of mine? I have a nom and co-nom(Peter Capaldi) at the moment in the target articles. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I do have a couple of yours bookmarked to review! IntentionallyDense (talk) 15:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pre-readthrough Remarks

edit

Very well-written article, already passes half the criteria, and I have just skimmed it, IntentionallyDense. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I just want to point out that medical articles have their own MOS which can be found at WP:MEDMOS which should clear up some things for you. In regards to society and culture the issue is more to do with finding sources that pass WP:MEDRS and issues with due weight. IntentionallyDense (talk) 07:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for linking this btw, makes it easier to review knowing what MOS is being used, a comprehensive one at that. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Ref-51: Are student newspapers reliable?
    • ?   Done
  • Consider making Prevention, Treatment and Outlook a single heading, maybe "Prevention and Treatement", or just the first two, and outlook under symptoms?
    • Reiterated under those headings
  • Also Causes and Mechanism
    • Will reiterate, see above

*Society and Culture- probably not expandable, bcs its a rare disease?

  • Shouldn't History be the first heading?

Going section by section.

Lead

edit
  • parenchymal or extraparenchymal- explain the terms?
  Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • and this- TSOL18 vaccines
Removed the vaccine name since I think it is overly technical for the lead, let me know if you need further changes. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • ... surgery, acetazolamide ...: rephrase, compounds running together with causes.
Sorry what do you mean by this? Neither of these are causes of the disease. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, should have clarified myself better. carbamazepine for seizures and surgery, and acetazolamide, steroids, or mannitol for intracranial hypertension. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you this helps a lot. IntentionallyDense (talk) 15:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Done does that look better? IntentionallyDense (talk) 16:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
it does. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 19:58, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Antiparasitic drugs should not be used: "are not" maybe? as not a guide
  Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Not necessary, but para 3 reads like a wall of text, split into two?
I can't find the exact guideline but usually, leads are supposed to be under 4 paragraphs hence why I combined those two topics. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Maybe shorten the paragraph then, does like look too much detail for the lead. For eg, Common antiparasitic medications ... against calcified cysts. and Prednisolone and dexamethasone ... mass inflammation risks. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Should I remove the prognosis info from this paragraph? IntentionallyDense (talk) 16:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
No, keep it. Seems important enough for the lead. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Okay I'll work on trimming tht section a bit. IntentionallyDense (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I trimmed it a bit.   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 16:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
good, but I think medication names should be removed? overviews don't really need that much detail? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Prevention

edit
  • Per MOS:MED, "Some sections will necessarily be absent or may be better merged"; also can it be expanded?
How would this be better merged? I don't think it could really be expanded much more unless I wan't to start going into the details of smaller studies done on prevention methods in endemic areas. If you feel like that would bring the article to GA status please let me know! IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hmm, okay, does not need expansion then- I just expected a bigger disease to be more complex to prevent. I think the average person assumes that prevent and prognosis can be under a heading named "Prevention, Treatment and Outlook", or even "Prevention and Treatment"? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:26, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think it would be reasonable to combine prevention and treatment but the outlook seems a little too different of a topic to merge if you get what I mean. There is more details on like education methods but then it kinda becomes a how to manual on preventing the disease. unfortunately due to the nature of the disease (happens mostly in poorer areas) the prevention is mostly education which i could emphasize more if you think that would be helpful. IntentionallyDense (talk) 16:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I mean, outlook is close enough, of what the chances of survival are with/without treatment, but if you wanna keep it separated, that's fine too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I combined treatment and prevention but would prefer to keep outlook seperate. IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Outlook

edit
  • ... good prognosis however ...: ... good prognosis, however ...
  Done
  • Per MOS:MED, "Some sections will necessarily be absent or may be better merged"
Is there a reason why this could be better merged? I don't feel that it is really under the topic of any of the other sections. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Per above. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Epidemiology

edit
  • needs comma between countries and except
  Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • needs comma between US and however
  Done
  • Can this be expanded?
Not really. I couldn't find specific figures for the estimated prevalence since it often goes undiagnosed but I'll see what I can do. IntentionallyDense (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

History

edit

All good

Society and Culture

edit
  • All good, but do try to expand, if possible

Causes

edit

All fine

Diagnosis

edit
  • coproparasitologic- what does this mean?
  • gross hyperdensity of bone structures on CT- or this?
  • extramedullary subarachnoid- ?
  • Are classification and diagnosis supposed to be in bullet form as per WP:MEDMOS? I got confused reading the MOS. If yes, fine. If no- change to prose(and put some of the footnotes in-text)

Treatement

edit
  • must be characterized: has to be characterised (unless the former sounds okay to you)

Overall

edit

Will do the rest of the review later, IntentionallyDense. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewed three more headings, just two more heading remain. Barely any changes needed, well done, IntentionallyDense. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):  
    b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·