Talk:Shellfish allergy/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CommanderWaterford (talk · contribs) 16:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

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): ✓ Pass b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): ✓ Pass

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): ✓ Pass b (citations to reliable sources): ✓ Pass c (OR): ✓ Pass d (copyvio and plagiarism): ✓ Pass

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): ✓ Pass b (focused): ✓ Pass

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: ✓ Pass

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.: ✓ Pass

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): ✓ Pass b (appropriate use with suitable captions): ✓ Pass

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: ✓ Pass

   Comment: Currently put on hold, discussion took place on my talk page with the nominator, further need to solve a few more citations needed (templated inside the article), expect to continue this week CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

All 'citations needed' resolved by use of existing refs. Ref list check found two "dead" refs. One deleted, as other refs covered the content, and the other replaced by a newer version of the same FDA document. David notMD (talk) 14:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Regulations section refs checked. Added text and ref for regulations in Japan. David notMD (talk) 16:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)