Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Rotavirus/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've listed this article for peer review because I have done all I can with it at this stage and need some feedback.


Thanks,

GrahamColm 15:18, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia

[edit]

Hi, Graham, I'll start a section here and add to it as I'm able. I went through last week and made sure most of your WP:MOS issues were in order and that your referencing style was correct, so I don't expect to find much there. I'll add more points as I read; you do *not* have to respond back to me on each issue.

  • The "Vaccines" section refers to Rotavirus Vaccine Project, but the WP:LEAD refers to the Rotavirus Vaccine Program–two different names. Also, the second occurrence is wikilinked, when it should be linked on the first occurrence. Since it's in the lead, I always like to see the article stub created, but that's not strictly necessary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Boys are twice as likely to be admitted to hospital than girls."
  • "(For and explanation of reassortment see Virus). "
  • Note typo, but more importantly, avoid sending readers to and fro to find information they need here. Find a way to avoid this, either by defining the term or linking to something directly that does, avoiding the parenthetical. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the 1960s, the epidemic (sic) diarrhoea of infant mice (EDIM) virus was discovered."
  • The reader isn't told why the (sic). If the "epidemic" was a misnomer, why not just leave it out? Or somehow address this to make it easier on the reader. If it's not a direct quote, do you need the sic? If not, can you avoid the entire issue somehow?
  • The "Pathogenesis" section says:
  • Childhood mortality caused by rotavirus is relatively low in the U.S., with an estimated 100 cases per year, but reaches over 500,000 cases per year worldwide (as of 2005).[citation needed]
  • but "Epidemiology" says:
  • About 120 million rotavirus infections occur every year, causing the death of 600,000 to 650,000 children.[49]
  • And the lead says:
  • In America, rotaviruses cause an estimated 1 million episodes of gastroenteritis which result in 150 deaths each year.
  • The lead introduces a term that is not defined (double-stranded). You either have to link or define it for us dummies, or find a way not to have to mention it in the lead. I worked earlier on reducing WP:OVERLINKing of common terms in the article, but you have to be sure to link or define technical or relevant terms that some readers (like me) don't know.
  • The WP:LEAD is supposed to be a stand-alone summary of the entire article, hitting all the highlights (have a read of the Lead article). It doesn't touch on all the important points, yet it does mention veterinary aspects, a topic which is barely addressed in the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The term "VP" is first introduced in "Rotavirus proteins",
  • There are six viral proteins, (VP) ...

Colin

[edit]
  • The lead sentence should make it clear what Rotavirus is (a genus of virus). A quick glance at other virus/genus articles shows there is some inconsistency in whether to use singular (rotavirus is a ...) or plural (the rotaviruses are ...). Is there any standard for this among your sources?
  • Does the vaccine protect against all the human-infecting groups (A, B, C)?

That's all for now. Might get a chance to read some more later. Colin°Talk 13:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Colin, thanks for taking the time to read the article. Yes, the lead does need some more work. I actually prefer the plural Rotaviruses but the fashion is to use the singular because it also works as an adjective; people are said to have a rotavirus infection, (strictly this should be rotaviral infection). Your second question is an important one. Vaccines have only been developed against group A rotavirus, (?rotaviruses) because they cause over 90% of infections of humans. They afford no protection at all against the other groups. I will work this into the article.

GrahamColmTalk 20:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

[edit]

Thank you for all the very helpful comments. I have edited the article and incorporated all these points and now I the article is much improved. There are still a few minor tweeks and edits that I can see need to be done, but any further comments are very welcome. I will be taking the advise of User:SandyGeorgia and nominate Rotavirus for GA status at the weekend. Thanks once more --GrahamColm(Talk ) 19:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]