Smoking was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that smoking(cigarette pictured) has a history that dates back at least 5,000 years and is one of the most widely practiced recreational activities in the world?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Addictions and recovery, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of addiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Addictions and recoveryWikipedia:WikiProject Addictions and recoveryTemplate:WikiProject Addictions and recoveryaddiction and recovery
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Men's Issues, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Men's Issues articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Men's IssuesWikipedia:WikiProject Men's IssuesTemplate:WikiProject Men's IssuesMen's Issues
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia
The current introductory paragraphs could be made more succinct by direct wording (i.e. "Smoking has negative health effects" could be reworded to "Smoking harms people"), reorganization, and the removal of small details which can already be found in more relevant articles (i.e. "bidis" and "nicotinic acetlycholine receptors" are already mentioned in "Tobacco smoking").
I made such an edit, but it was reverted before I could group my single-sentence paragraphs with the relevant large paragraphs. The reversion's comment said to talk to others about it. I am mainly a Wiktionary editor accustomed to unilateral edits on infrequently edited entries, so I apologize if I have violated etiquette, but I think these changes improve the article. Please have a look and tell me what you think. PhalanxDown (talk) 17:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your response and I'm glad Wikipedia editors take this topic seriously. I worry the current wording is unclear because of the length and frequent use of technical and formal vocabulary instead of using colloquialisms, implication (rather than explicit mention), and single-word equivalents (i.e. "active substance" instead of "drug" or "pharmacon", explicit "route of administration" mention instead of just being implied, "negative health effects" instead of "harm"). I know some people who might these daunting to read. The sooner the text is improved the better, regardless of my edit.
Would you tell me how I should go about consulting those members? I am new to this, and don't know what would suffice. Do I need to have them show their approval of my edit on this talk page? Also, I notice the "Addictions and recovery" and "Health and fitness" WikiProject pages say they are inactive; is it still possible to reach consensus? Also, the Pharmacology WikiProject seems to focus on chemical articles; is it necessary to seek their approval when all I propose is rewording or omitted existing information (that presumably was approved)? PhalanxDown (talk) 19:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
