Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mental status examination/1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Creating GAR nomination page (GAR-helper) |
→Mental status examination: My take Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
: {{GAR/current}}<br/> |
: {{GAR/current}}<br/> |
||
In addition to containing significant uncited material, this 2008 listing contains few sources from the decade and a half since its promotion; I thus believe that it does not meet [[WP:GACR|GA criterion 2b)]] or the standards of [[WP:MEDRS]]. [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 04:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
In addition to containing significant uncited material, this 2008 listing contains few sources from the decade and a half since its promotion; I thus believe that it does not meet [[WP:GACR|GA criterion 2b)]] or the standards of [[WP:MEDRS]]. [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 04:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
||
* I have no objection to '''de-list'''ing. I think if this was the state of the article when I assessed it I should not have promoted it. The uncited information is the most concerning, but also the writing is quite jargony in places. Also, (this is minor but) I think the images of art with the captions claiming these could be a representation of a disordered thought process are a stretch. There are descriptions of visual signs such as unusual clothing that could be much better examples for images. I'm not sure I agree that the sources being old is a problem for most of the article--if it's a widely used test that's been the gold standard for years you might not expect much to change about it--but we'd at least want to check that that's the case and that it's not changed importantly. [[user:delldot|<span style="color:#990066">delldot</span>]] <small>[[user talk:delldot|<span style="color:DarkRed">∇.</span>]]</small> 14:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 14:44, 1 March 2024
Mental status examination
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result pending
In addition to containing significant uncited material, this 2008 listing contains few sources from the decade and a half since its promotion; I thus believe that it does not meet GA criterion 2b) or the standards of WP:MEDRS. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have no objection to de-listing. I think if this was the state of the article when I assessed it I should not have promoted it. The uncited information is the most concerning, but also the writing is quite jargony in places. Also, (this is minor but) I think the images of art with the captions claiming these could be a representation of a disordered thought process are a stretch. There are descriptions of visual signs such as unusual clothing that could be much better examples for images. I'm not sure I agree that the sources being old is a problem for most of the article--if it's a widely used test that's been the gold standard for years you might not expect much to change about it--but we'd at least want to check that that's the case and that it's not changed importantly. delldot ∇. 14:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)