Talk:Aging brain/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 00:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I'll be taking this article for review, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 00:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I am going to have to fail this article's nomination for GA status. Here are the issues I saw in an initial sweep through the article:
- The largest issue I found is with old sources and sources that do not conform to WP:MEDRS. Per MEDRS, the article should rely mainly on secondary sources and sources newer than five years old, if possible. In a quick look through the sources I see a lot that are over five years old, and many that are over ten years old - including at least one that is over 25 years old!! In the world of neurobiology and neuropsychology, this is forever! I also noted a heavy reliance on primary sources (one "in which the authors directly participated in the research or documented their personal experiences.", according to MEDRS), including some very old primary sources, which is a big no-no in medical articles.
- The Delaying the Effects of Aging section is very choppy and puts heavy emphasis on a couple of individual studies
- Inconsistencies in the method of citing sources - some page numbers are given in the text in parentheses and some are given in the references.
- Section headers should have the first letter of the first word capitalized and the first letters of the remainder of the words lowercase, unless they are proper nouns. So, "Delaying the effects of aging", not "Delaying the Effects of Aging"
- First three external links are dead
- One dab link to Sulcus
- It might be good to also take a look at WP:MEDMOS.
Because of the major issues with the sourcing and the lack of response by the nominator to the other articles they have nominated, I am going to fail this article's nomination for GA status. When the sourcing issues (and hopefully the others as well) have been addressed, this article may be brought back to GAN. However, I would suggest perhaps asking for a check from some of the wonderful people at WP:WikiProject Medicine first - although this is not a necessity for a good article nomination, there are some very helpful people over there who really understand the intricacies of writing about medical articles on Wikipedia. Good luck in your future editing, Dana boomer (talk) 01:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)