Kivu Ebola epidemic has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: March 9, 2021. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kivu Ebola epidemic article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
A news item involving Kivu Ebola epidemic was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on the following dates: |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
A fact from Kivu Ebola epidemic appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 26 March 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
review
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Reviewer: Casliber ( talk · contribs) 23:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
First off, you wanna make the lead more punchy and structured.
The epidemiology section looks odd with a big table at the top, however I concede it is hard to see where it would otherwise go. I think a summary paragraph which states how many cases and deaths over what time period is important to put at the top actually. Done (please see article as several edits were needed for this)
Earwigs copyvio is clear 1. Well written?:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
3. Broad in coverage?:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
5. Reasonably stable?
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
|
DYK
|
---|
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk) 04:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
( )
Improved to Good Article status by Ozzie10aaaa ( talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC).
|
Kivu Ebola epidemic has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: March 9, 2021. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kivu Ebola epidemic article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
A news item involving Kivu Ebola epidemic was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on the following dates: |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
A fact from Kivu Ebola epidemic appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 26 March 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
review
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Reviewer: Casliber ( talk · contribs) 23:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
First off, you wanna make the lead more punchy and structured.
The epidemiology section looks odd with a big table at the top, however I concede it is hard to see where it would otherwise go. I think a summary paragraph which states how many cases and deaths over what time period is important to put at the top actually. Done (please see article as several edits were needed for this)
Earwigs copyvio is clear 1. Well written?:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
3. Broad in coverage?:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
5. Reasonably stable?
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
|
DYK
|
---|
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk) 04:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
( )
Improved to Good Article status by Ozzie10aaaa ( talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC).
|