I will leave reviewing the lead section until I have worked my way through the rest of the article. My first impression is that the article is basically sound but needs a little tidying up.
Thanks for taking this up. --LT910001 (talk) 06:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The parathyroid glands are two pairs of glands positioned behind the outer wings of the thyroid. There are typically four parathyroid glands." - This seems repetitive and could be restated in a single sentence. (See additional suggestion below.)
Not done Am a fan of Ernest Hemingway. Would it be any trouble if I retain this wording? --LT910001 (talk) 06:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Two pairs = four, so if you want to retain this, perhaps you should expand the second sentence: "There are typically four parathyroid glands but occasionally ... " Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done? I can't find this sentence anymore, so it must have been copy-edited out. --LT910001 (talk) 09:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The parathyroid glands usually weigh between ... " - Is this a total weight for all the glands?
Done Per gland. I've provided a new source as I don't have access to the original. --LT910001 (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"... are equivalent to the thyroid gland." - Do you mean similar to, or identical to or what?
Done Thanks, that wording was indeed confusing --LT910001 (talk) 06:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The parathyroid artery drains into ..." - Should this be the "parathyroid vein"?
Done Yes it should be --LT910001 (talk) 06:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The superior and middle veins drain into the jugular vein and the inferior thyroid vein drains into the brachiocephalic veins." - Think about singular and plural in relation to this sentence.
"Oxyphil cells, which are lighter in appearance and increase with age, of unknown function." - Do they increase in number or size? This sentence lacks a main verb.
The section "Development" - I had to read this paragraph several times before I understood just what it meant and I think it needs some rearrangement. The sentence "Consequently, the inferior glands develop in a position above the superior glands, but their positions are ultimately reversed." might be better without the word "consequently", which is often used to mean "as a result of this", or you could use "thus".
Done I've reworded it to make it clearer. --LT910001 (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In the "Function" section, some words have odd capitalisation.
Done I fixed what I think you mean --LT910001 (talk) 06:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clinical significance, history and other animals[edit]
Resolved issues from Cwmhiraeth
"... which relate to the excess or deficiency of parathyroid hormone." - "circulating" or "in the blood" or whatever.
"For several years, Sandström's description received little attention, until more was known about their relationship with Rickets and muscular tetani." - This needs further explanation.
Done I've removed this sentence as I don't think it adds much anyway. --LT910001 (talk) 07:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Due to a hereditary mental illness, at age 37 Sandstrom committed suicide." This is really outside the scope of this article.
"Studies of parathyroid hormone levels by Roger Guillemin, Andrew Schally and Rosalyn Sussman Yalow that lead to the development of immunoassays capable of measuring body substances led to a Nobel Prize in 1977." - This sentence is a bit awkward and could be rephrased. It also uses "lead" where it should be "led".
"The fact that developmental genes genes and calcium-sensing receptors in fish gills is similar to those within the parathyroid glands of birds and mammals." - Also awkward.
That's all for the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:02, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking up this review. I look forward to working with you, and will respond to your concerns within a week. --LT910001 (talk) 21:21, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Cwmhiraeth, I've responded to you concerns and await your response. --LT910001 (talk) 07:21, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "chief cells" should be capitalised. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the ultra-structure of the chief cells and oxyphil cells should be included. It is interesting to see what the mysterious oxyphil cells look like under the electron microscope. Snowman (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please feel free to add this with a reliable source in the 'histology' section; however I do not think not including this should prevent nomination. --LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I took a look and was very happy with the quality of the article. If there are any specific medical questions (Cwmhiraeth please ask me and I will see if I can answer. My only points are two that I will fix myself if this is acceptable. They do not really have to do with the GA review save possibly the first one.
Under the history section I am missing mention of how early thyroidectomy was risk-filled seeing as the surgeons did not know of the parathyroid glands and if these were inadvertently removed they patients would die. I will add from either:
I have a number of images on my computer awaiting cropping and uploading, some of which would be excellent for this article. I will upload these images first.
P.S. Both the above articles are sources of public domain images which I will also upload in the coming days. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 19:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've commented in the thread on the talk page so that we don't have multiple duplicate threads. --LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input into the article. I look forward to concluding the review within a few days. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:47, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Me too. I've boxed the comments that I feel I have resolved; if they're not, please unbox them and let me know.--LT910001 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ping to Cwmhiraeth. I feel I have addressed your concerns. Is there anything that still needs to be done? --LT910001 (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am proposing to do a final check on all aspects of the article shortly. Have you settled which images are to be used? The formatting of the references is not very consistent and could be improved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
1b The article conforms with the MOS guidelines with regard to layout and style.
2a&b The article is well referenced and has inline citations for all contentious statements. The formatting of the references lacks consistency.
2c There is no original research as far as I can see.
3a&b The coverage is broad enough and the article does not include irrelevant material.
4 The article is neutral.
5 The article has been edited by the nominator and other users but there has been no edit warring.
6 The images are in the public domain or have suitable licenses.
7 The images are relevant to the topic and have suitable captions.
Overall assessment -
Thanks, sorry, I will get to this in the coming day or two. --LT910001 (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I've tried to remove the most egregious inconsistencies from the citations. Cwmhiraeth, citations formatted in wiki-stye are not exactly my forte, if you can point out one or two examples of what else needs doing I'll get to it. --LT910001 (talk) 02:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I made one more change and the referencing now looks better. Well done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:20, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
