Wikipedia:Peer review/Lipid/archive1

"This article was externally reviewed on 14 December 2005 by Nature. No significant errors or major omissions were found." So content is pretty good. What about style? Do you think it's good enough for FAC?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article is just one section. There is no distinct lead section and no references are present. Not good enough for FAC in its present state. «LordViD» 02:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cholesterol is always considered a lipid in a medical & human physiology context, and this would be a common reason for a reader to look at this article. We need a section on cholesterol and other sterols explaining how they differ from triglycerides and in what contexts they are or are not considered lipids. alteripse 14:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]