Talk:Urbach–Wiethe disease
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | Urbach–Wiethe disease was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 5, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that typical symptoms of Urbach-Wiethe disease, a rare autosomal recessive disease, are a hoarse voice and beaded papules around the eyelids? | |||||||||
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Urbach–Wiethe disease.
|
Good Article nomination
The article is excellent, follows the guidelines of WP:MEDMOS properly. I only have 2 minor suggestions:
- A few words might be too scientific for readers such as amygdalectomized.
- There are no external links while these could be useful: Who Named It, [wwwlb.aub.edu.lb/~webderm/downloads/cases/15.pdf case presentation in pdf]
That's all I think is needed to meet the Good Article criteria.
Thank you!
NCurse work 08:19, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- In addition to explaining medical terms used in this article (i.e., fulfilling GA criterion 1b with regard to jargon), I would also add any available images relevant to Urbach-Wiethe disease per GA criterion 6 (see WP:GACR). Although a graphic of chromosome 1 is informative, it would be even better to have a picture showing the effects of this disease on either gross or microscopic anatomy. Also, per WP:LEADCITE (part of criterion 1b), consider removing redundant citations to material in the lead that is non-controversial or not especially complex. With eleven citations (several of which appear more than once) in the lead, that section seems slightly cluttered relative to GA convention.
- I would have reviewed this article for GA, but I did some significant editing for style a few weeks ago that could be reasonably interpreted as a conflict of interest. Emw2012 (talk) 02:02, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Review is closed. Due to the lack of editors who could address the last minor requests, it doesn't pass the GA criteria now. NCurse work 20:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)