492:
470:
430:
404:
379:
357:
331:
287:
258:
188:
513:
309:
225:
42:
546:
I believe stating the founding year and publisher falls within "basic facts" and since there isn't any more information available on the history of the journal, I don't think a background/history section would be justified. As for the sentence about North Korean medical journals, I've incorporated
292:
The four sources (including the Korean news article, viewed through translation) appear reliable. Three include in-depth material directly about this journal; the fourth is a news story about one of its articles. As an article about a publication, rather than about medicine more directly, I do not
314:
Most of the claims in the article checked out as an accurate representation of the sources, but there is one that I am unsure about. In "Research", our article states "hurt by the rise of drug-resistant mosquitos". In the source, it talks about drug-resistant malaria protozoa, not drug-resistant
362:
This is a short article, but I'm amazed that you managed to expand it this far with appropriate sourcing. Most strong western journals do not have this level of coverage and analysis. So I think the length and depth of coverage is as good as or better than we can reasonably
475:
The cover image was uploaded to commons, where it appears headed for deletion (the correct outcome if it is deemed to have enough creative content to be copyrightable). However, it also exists locally, as a fair-use image with what appears to be a valid fair-use
230:
The lead contains several claims: (1) founding date, (2) publisher, (3) level of quality. These are appropriate content for the body of the article, and should be moved there. The lead should only summarize content from the body, not make new
384:
The only potential 3b content would be the final paragraph of "Research", covering specific articles in the journal. But as it is properly sourced and a small part of the overall article, I don't think this is
409:
There is some editorial opinion (particularly about not being up to an international standard) but this is properly sourced and I think not particularly controversial.
215:
80:
47:
70:
460:
281:
219:
211:
518:
Please address issues listed in 1b and 2c. If you need time to do so please let me know and I can put this review on hold to give you that time. —
126:
203:
276:, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or
156:
122:
52:
166:
107:
277:
544:
part from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article.
207:
555:
99:
75:
497:
The article is illustrated only by a fair-use image of its cover page, typical of and appropriate for an article on a journal
303:
263:
Citations are consistently formatted as short footnotes pointing to a separate section of
Citation Style 1 references
464:
482:
269:
199:
569:
523:
452:
150:
456:
373:
240:
369:
351:
325:
321:
565:
552:
539:
519:
146:
115:
17:
486:
424:
280:, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the
251:
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
444:
294:
170:
548:
401:
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
394:
252:
92:
273:
542:
I've addressed 2C. Regarding 1B, the MOS guideline on lede sections states that,
185:
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
573:
559:
527:
160:
435:
No significant controversy visible on the article's talk page or history.
423:
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
336:
Neither Earwig nor my source checks found any significant copying.
564:
Ok, I can accept that. All issues addressed; passing. —
134:
103:
315:mosquitos. Can you check and correct, please?
8:
372:without going into unnecessary detail (see
30:
547:into the rest of the article. Cheers! :3
61:
33:
543:
7:
442:Is it illustrated, if possible, by
512:
308:
297:should be applied to this article.
224:
24:
511:
490:
468:
428:
402:
377:
355:
329:
307:
293:think the stricter standards of
285:
256:
223:
186:
282:scientific citation guidelines
1:
461:valid non-free use rationales
491:
469:
429:
403:
378:
356:
330:
286:
257:
193:No issues with prose quality
187:
592:
253:the layout style guideline
574:18:25, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
560:06:31, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
528:23:21, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
198:B. It complies with the
161:22:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
485:to the topic, and have
278:likely to be challenged
345:broad in its coverage
427:or content dispute:
370:focused on the topic
350:A. It addresses the
322:copyright violations
304:no original research
246:no original research
18:Talk:Basic Medicine
320:D. It contains no
220:list incorporation
487:suitable captions
463:are provided for
270:in-line citations
89:
88:
583:
515:
514:
494:
493:
472:
471:
465:non-free content
457:copyright status
432:
431:
406:
405:
381:
380:
359:
358:
333:
332:
311:
310:
289:
288:
274:reliable sources
260:
259:
227:
226:
190:
189:
139:
130:
111:
43:Copyvio detector
31:
591:
590:
586:
585:
584:
582:
581:
580:
302:C. It contains
202:guidelines for
200:manual of style
120:
97:
91:
85:
57:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
589:
587:
579:
578:
577:
576:
566:David Eppstein
540:David Eppstein
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
520:David Eppstein
510:Pass or Fail:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
481:B. Images are
479:
478:
477:
451:A. Images are
440:
439:
438:
437:
436:
414:
413:
412:
411:
410:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
366:
365:
364:
354:of the topic:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
318:
317:
316:
300:
299:
298:
266:
265:
264:
236:
235:
234:
233:
232:
212:words to watch
196:
195:
194:
147:David Eppstein
140:
87:
86:
84:
83:
78:
73:
67:
64:
63:
59:
58:
56:
55:
53:External links
50:
45:
39:
36:
35:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
588:
575:
571:
567:
563:
562:
561:
557:
554:
550:
545:
541:
537:
536:
529:
525:
521:
517:
516:
509:
508:
506:
503:
496:
495:
488:
484:
480:
474:
473:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
449:
447:
446:
441:
434:
433:
426:
422:
421:
419:
415:
408:
407:
400:
399:
397:
396:
391:
383:
382:
375:
374:summary style
371:
367:
361:
360:
353:
349:
348:
346:
342:
335:
334:
327:
323:
319:
313:
312:
305:
301:
296:
291:
290:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
262:
261:
254:
250:
249:
247:
243:
242:
237:
229:
228:
221:
217:
213:
209:
205:
204:lead sections
201:
197:
192:
191:
184:
183:
181:
177:
176:
175:
174:
172:
169:review – see
168:
163:
162:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
141:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
82:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
68:
66:
65:
60:
54:
51:
49:
46:
44:
41:
40:
38:
37:
32:
26:
19:
504:
443:
417:
393:
385:problematic.
368:B. It stays
352:main aspects
344:
245:
239:
180:well written
179:
173:for criteria
165:
164:
153:
143:
142:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
90:
81:Instructions
455:with their
104:visual edit
476:rationale.
326:plagiarism
241:verifiable
48:Authorship
34:GA toolbox
272:are from
144:Reviewer:
71:Templates
62:Reviewing
27:GA Review
483:relevant
425:edit war
295:WP:MEDRS
171:WP:WIAGA
157:contribs
76:Criteria
505:Overall
395:neutral
363:expect.
268:B. All
231:claims.
216:fiction
127:history
108:history
94:Article
459:, and
453:tagged
445:images
418:stable
416:Is it
392:Is it
343:Is it
238:Is it
218:, and
208:layout
178:Is it
244:with
136:Watch
16:<
570:talk
553:they
524:talk
324:nor
151:talk
123:edit
100:edit
556:/it
549:F4U
376:):
572:)
558:)
526:)
507::
489::
467::
448:?
420:?
398:?
347:?
328::
306::
284::
255::
248:?
222::
214:,
210:,
206:,
182:?
167:GA
159:)
125:|
106:|
102:|
568:(
551:(
538:@
522:(
154:·
149:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.