GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: ManfromButtonwillow ( talk · contribs) 19:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I’ve not performed a GAN review before, but have been lurking for quite a long time and believe this is an important process on Wikipedia. I chose your article as my first because it is simple, well contained, and because anatomy is something I at least took a class on, albeit many years ago.. Your patience is appreciated if I make any missteps..
Criteria 1b:
The lead should be a summary of the article, and as such the last sentence referencing taste buds on the epiglottis—while interesting—should probably be moved to another section. Either “Structure” or “Function”.
The footnote clarifying that the leaf shape referred to is that of purslane.. may be better incorporated into the text, or removed. If it is included, I might like to see the sentence restructured. Something like “it has been described by Grey’s anatomy as being shaped like a leaf of purslane, and [...]”
Criteria 1a
“The epiglottis forms a space between itself and the tongue called the vallecula.” Suggest rewording to “The space formed between the epiglottis and the tongue is called the vallecula”, or something along those lines. The phrasing used may be standard in anatomical context.. if so I don’t have a strong opinion on it. It just read funny to me since it seems to assign causality to the epiglottis for forming the space, rather than passively acknowledge that a space exists between it and the tongue, and that the space has a name.
I’m guessing that the “(in Estonian)” parenthetical has a meaning that could be confusing to the average reader.. including myself. Would it be possible to clarify what this means?
I would wikilink non-keratinized.
“It is likely that during swallowing the hyoid bone and the larynx move upwards and forwards, which increases passive pressure from the back of the tongue; because the ariepiglottic muscles contract; because of the passive weight of the food pushing down; and because of contraction of laryngeal and because of contraction of thyroarytenoid muscles.” It isn’t entirely clear if these are intended to be competitive theories of how the epiglottis moves or complementary. I would rework this section to improve clarity.
“In many languages, the epiglottis is not essential for producing sounds. In some languages, the epiglottis is used to produce epiglottal consonant speech sounds, though this sound-type is rather rare.” Small thing, but it makes more sense to me to invert the order of these two sentences. Highlight that it is used in some languages to produce sounds first, then note that it is rare and that many languages do not require the use of the epiglottis. Perhaps a couple examples of languages that require its use would be interesting, if you’re inclined to include some.
In the “inflammation” section, pharynx is wikilinked redundantly, but racemic epinephrine, sympathomimetic bronchodilator, and aerosol are not. On that note, check for redundant wiki linking. I see a couple examples, but there may be others.
“The incidence of epiglottitis has decreased significantly in countries where vaccination against Haemophilus influenzae is administered“. I think this sentence would be better placed after the first sentence of this section, where H. influenzae is mentioned as the principle cause of Epiglottitis. I believe that using the shorthand H. influenzae after the first mention would be appropriate.
“It also has Greek roots”. I’m sure this is a reference to the etymology, but I’d recommend clarifying this, and also provide a breakdown of the Greek origin and root meanings.
Criteria 2:
Two small things, there is a citation needed tag, and one sentence does not have a reference (“ Behind the root of the tongue is an epiglottic vallecula which is an important anatomical landmark in intubation.”)
Otherwise everything seems to be cited to reliable sources.
Images all appear to be appropriately licensed.
Criteria 3:
The article covers all areas required per the anatomy MOS and does not contain extraneous information, although as mentioned before, some expansion on the etymology of the word would be appropriate.
Edit: the article doesn’t have any comparative anatomy. A brief search revealed a number of important and interesting differences between the human epiglottis and many other animals. I think including some of the highlights would be important to cover the “broad in scope” criteria. ManfromButtonwillow ( talk) 19:32, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Criteria 4:
Neutrality is not an issue in this article.
Criteria 5:
The article is stable, no edit wars.
Criteria 6:
The article is illustrated by six images. Captions and licensing are fine, although I would remove the period in the caption reading “ Epiglotic cartilage.” All images add something to the article.
Article is on hold for the time being. Thank you, ManfromButtonwillow ( talk) 19:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: ManfromButtonwillow ( talk · contribs) 19:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, I’ve not performed a GAN review before, but have been lurking for quite a long time and believe this is an important process on Wikipedia. I chose your article as my first because it is simple, well contained, and because anatomy is something I at least took a class on, albeit many years ago.. Your patience is appreciated if I make any missteps..
Criteria 1b:
The lead should be a summary of the article, and as such the last sentence referencing taste buds on the epiglottis—while interesting—should probably be moved to another section. Either “Structure” or “Function”.
The footnote clarifying that the leaf shape referred to is that of purslane.. may be better incorporated into the text, or removed. If it is included, I might like to see the sentence restructured. Something like “it has been described by Grey’s anatomy as being shaped like a leaf of purslane, and [...]”
Criteria 1a
“The epiglottis forms a space between itself and the tongue called the vallecula.” Suggest rewording to “The space formed between the epiglottis and the tongue is called the vallecula”, or something along those lines. The phrasing used may be standard in anatomical context.. if so I don’t have a strong opinion on it. It just read funny to me since it seems to assign causality to the epiglottis for forming the space, rather than passively acknowledge that a space exists between it and the tongue, and that the space has a name.
I’m guessing that the “(in Estonian)” parenthetical has a meaning that could be confusing to the average reader.. including myself. Would it be possible to clarify what this means?
I would wikilink non-keratinized.
“It is likely that during swallowing the hyoid bone and the larynx move upwards and forwards, which increases passive pressure from the back of the tongue; because the ariepiglottic muscles contract; because of the passive weight of the food pushing down; and because of contraction of laryngeal and because of contraction of thyroarytenoid muscles.” It isn’t entirely clear if these are intended to be competitive theories of how the epiglottis moves or complementary. I would rework this section to improve clarity.
“In many languages, the epiglottis is not essential for producing sounds. In some languages, the epiglottis is used to produce epiglottal consonant speech sounds, though this sound-type is rather rare.” Small thing, but it makes more sense to me to invert the order of these two sentences. Highlight that it is used in some languages to produce sounds first, then note that it is rare and that many languages do not require the use of the epiglottis. Perhaps a couple examples of languages that require its use would be interesting, if you’re inclined to include some.
In the “inflammation” section, pharynx is wikilinked redundantly, but racemic epinephrine, sympathomimetic bronchodilator, and aerosol are not. On that note, check for redundant wiki linking. I see a couple examples, but there may be others.
“The incidence of epiglottitis has decreased significantly in countries where vaccination against Haemophilus influenzae is administered“. I think this sentence would be better placed after the first sentence of this section, where H. influenzae is mentioned as the principle cause of Epiglottitis. I believe that using the shorthand H. influenzae after the first mention would be appropriate.
“It also has Greek roots”. I’m sure this is a reference to the etymology, but I’d recommend clarifying this, and also provide a breakdown of the Greek origin and root meanings.
Criteria 2:
Two small things, there is a citation needed tag, and one sentence does not have a reference (“ Behind the root of the tongue is an epiglottic vallecula which is an important anatomical landmark in intubation.”)
Otherwise everything seems to be cited to reliable sources.
Images all appear to be appropriately licensed.
Criteria 3:
The article covers all areas required per the anatomy MOS and does not contain extraneous information, although as mentioned before, some expansion on the etymology of the word would be appropriate.
Edit: the article doesn’t have any comparative anatomy. A brief search revealed a number of important and interesting differences between the human epiglottis and many other animals. I think including some of the highlights would be important to cover the “broad in scope” criteria. ManfromButtonwillow ( talk) 19:32, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Criteria 4:
Neutrality is not an issue in this article.
Criteria 5:
The article is stable, no edit wars.
Criteria 6:
The article is illustrated by six images. Captions and licensing are fine, although I would remove the period in the caption reading “ Epiglotic cartilage.” All images add something to the article.
Article is on hold for the time being. Thank you, ManfromButtonwillow ( talk) 19:07, 20 October 2019 (UTC)