Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology/Assessment/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive of requested assessments for pharmacology articles[edit]

2011[edit]

  • fen-phen. Please note that I have COI issues which have been posted on the fenphen discussion page. I have included a government document that is to be found only on my site. It is a 20 year old intramural NIDA protocol. Although my name is on the protocol, that was a courtesy by the authors. Another citation which is cited on pubmed has the full text linked also to my google site. Are these citations Wiki appropriate?

I have passed this article by an academic friend who states that from his expert knowledge I have been factual and unbiased. Do tell me otherwise. User:Scientizzle has been helpful. PietrH (talk) 22:23, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done Rated Start. See Talk:Fenfluramine/phentermine#Rating for more information. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 14:41, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

2010[edit]

  • A.C.E. mixture, I rated this as a C class article with importance Low (Rational: referenced quite well, but the article is not very thorough and the subject of the article is quite old). I am just posting here to make sure that this is okay? Best regards, Captain n00dle\Talk 12:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I have made further improvements since placing this request, although I am not sure if it qualifies as a 'B' class article. Best regards, Captain n00dle\Talk 18:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 Done Rated High/Start, see Talk:Amantadine#Rating. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 20:10, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 Done Rated Start, see Talk:Olanzapine/fluoxetine for some suggestions. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 22:34, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 Done Rated B. The references section could do with some cleanup, otherwise you're not far from a Good Article in my opinion. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:16, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
I feel like this article must've come a long way since it was last reviewed. It is, at a minimum, a C-class article. I think that it is probably a B and may even merit a good article nomination, though I haven't looked at it thoroughly enough to go that far. horsedreamer 15:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 Done I've assessed this as C-class, and left some notes on the talk page about further improvement, which I'll try and work on. Perspeculum (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

2009[edit]

We're a group of pharmacystudents from Iceland that made this article. We would like to get it assessed to see how we did. This is a new page.

YesY Done. Assessed as B-class, could easily become a Good Article with a bit more work. If you are allowed, feel free to request input and/or help at WT:PHARM and WT:MED. Happy editing! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
This is currently rated as start/top. I feel it is neither a start, nor is it of top importance. It should probably be rerated as stub, and the importance should be lowered to mid/low. Given that it is country specific, there is no justification for a top importance rating. Chaldor (talk) 04:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 Done I've reviewed it. Renaissancee (talk) 03:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Levothyroxine - hasn't yet received an importance rating: I suspect it's either high or mid, but I'd like someone else's opinion. Alexrexpvt (talk) 16:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 Done rated. Renaissancee (talk) 03:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to say, but I don't see that the article fulfills criteria for a ‘B-Class’ rate. Project members should consider WP:1.0/B - especially (2), (3), and (5). I would suggest a rating of ‘start’ or ‘C’ at the very best. -- Alfie (talk) 01:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 Done Article removed from B class down to C glass. B class must pass a review examination before recieving the 'B' class. Renaissancee (talk) 03:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

2008[edit]

Undated[edit]

 Done Rated C – good content, but needs some cleanup (see Wikipedia:Peer review/Discovery and development of TRPV1 antagonists/archive1 for a start)