Wikipedia:Peer review/Irving Gottesman/archive1

Irving Gottesman

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the article is now GA and would like it to be an FA; after GA, I expanded coverage and fixed some MOS issues (both FA criteria), and tightened the language; peer review seems the logical next step.

Thanks, Churn and change (talk) 20:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

From MathewTownsend

This article badly needs a major copyedit. Just a few chosen from the lede:

• "He is known for his work on schizophrenia, especially among identical twins," - he's especially known among identical twins?

• "He has also researched on the ways" - on?

• "trying to tease out the separate and mingled contributions of genes and the family, social, cultural and economic environment to how the disorder onsets" - grammar problems and clumpsy wording

trying to tease out ... to how the disorder onsets, progresses and is inherited" - grammatically incorrect

"onsets" is not a word used in this context. It is not a verb.

• "These books carry both raw data from various studies, their statistical interpretation, and possible conclusions presented self-contained."

what does "presented self-contained" mean?

"These books carry" - do you mean "include"? - books don't usually "carry"

"both" - implies two, but the sentence seems to include more than two

• "Gottesman, along with Shields, have built models to explain how schizophrenia comes about, how it is passed on to future generations, and what decides its progress in a patient. This model explains all three elements as controlled by many genes acting along with the environment, with no cause enough on its own."

"have built models", "this model" - which model? what are "all three elements"

Gottesman, along with Shields, has - correct grammar

"how schizophrenia comes about" - not encyclopedic - the etiology of schizophrenia?

"and what decides its progress in a patient." - not encyclopedic wording - something decides? Do you mean the factors influencing the patient's prognosis?

• "This model explains all three elements as controlled by many genes acting along with the environment, with no cause enough on its own."

"with no cause enough on its own" - badly worded

why is environment piped to social environment? Are other environmental causes ruled out?

do you mean environmental causes/influences in general?

MathewTownsend (talk) 19:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I fixed the specific issues you mentioned. Can you note the issues in the remaining sections? Churn and change (talk) 20:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

(more)

• Suggest getting the article copy edited by the League of Copy Editors.

Okay. 23:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• I question that he was one of the founders of the field of Behavioral genetics since Francis Galton is usually given the credit.

Taken out; put specific claim in there. 23:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• the lede needs to be rewritten. It doesn't follow WP:LEAD.

In what way? The first paras are a summary of the body text. Churn and change (talk) 23:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• I don't think a list of every position he held or a list of every award he received, no matter how non notable or unimportant, enhances the article.

Fixed; took out a bunch. Churn and change (talk) 23:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• Much of the article seems to be an uncritical description of two books he wrote. This doesn't seem appropriate in a biography.

There isn't much criticism out there, except for the two pieces I note. Did you note any? If so, let me know. The reviews of the books I have in the sources are pretty much the main reviews out there. 23:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• IMO the article needs a copy edit and a rewrite. Recommend getting people from Project Medicine involved and becoming familiar with WP:MEDRS so that the information in the article is sourced correctly and is not misleading.

This is too vague. What is wrong with the sourcing? What is misleading? The sources are reliable, secondary and third party. As to misleading, I don't see the kind of criticism you are looking for in the literature. If you can find that, let me know. Churn and change (talk) 23:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

MathewTownsend (talk) 20:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• Comments: here are a few comments. I saw some places that could be improved, my impression wasn't as negative as Mathew's though. I made some copyedits as I went through. You might want to ping Casliber, since he's a great copyeditor and knows the subject area well.
• Watch for overlinking, I don't think PhD or Violence should be linked.
• " In 1972–1973 he received a Guggenheim fellowship" I think the MOS recommends "1972–73".
• I think one weakness of the prose is that some sentences are too long. You might try to chop some of the long ones in two.
• "A series of books, at times co-authored with colleagues, summarizes Gottesman's work." The middle part is a bit trivial for the lead, I think.
• "and possible conclusions presented with necessary background material." I'd remove "necessary" here.
• I suspect that the image wouldn't pass the FAC image review, they're very strict about the use of non-free images.
• There may be a MOS issue with the table, I don't know anything about tables though. Maybe check with User:The Rambling Man.
• There are some "Cite error: <ref> tag with name..." errors in the reference section.
• The sentences "After spending his last 16 years ..." and "Gottesman is married to Carol Applen, whom he wed on December 23, 1970. He has two sons." Don't seem to flow with the surrounding areas.
• Is there more you could add to the "Work on IQ" section? It starts with him testifying to the Senate, but I would assume he had built up a reputation for being knowledgeable in the area before then?
• The "Humanistic views" section doesn't seem to flow very well to me, it seems like unrelated things are being placed next to each other.
• "The model provided no specific therapeutic insight, but was useful as a guideline for further study." Useful according to whom?
• I'll probably be back for more, but hopefully these are helpful. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

more from MathewTownsend

• first paragraph ends with his obtaining his PhD from the University of Minnesota.

first sentence in second paragraph "A native of Ohio, Gottesman studied psychology for his undergraduate and graduate degrees" - could this be combined and not be repetative?

• "He is known for his work on schizophrenia, especially for researching the disorder in identical twins, trying to tease out the separate and mingled contributions of genes and the family, social, cultural and economic environment to the onset, progress and inter-generational transmission of the disease." - this seems too long and confusing. Perhaps "He is know for his work on identical twins, researching the relative contribution of genes and environment." (since environment includes the social and physical environments - the degree to which it is inherited and/or influenced by environmental factors.)
• I think you should say he is a psychologist.
• "He has also researched the ways genes and the environment add to how humans become violent and to how human intelligence varies." - perhaps something like "researched how the the interaction between genes and environment relate to variations in human intelligence and propensity to violence." or something like that.

• "... Summaries Gottesman's work. These publications include raw data from various studies, their statistical interpretation, and possible conclusions presented with necessary background material." how about something like "summarized Gottesman's research and his conclusions, as well as case studies of schizophrenic patients, including interviews with family members, that revealed the schizophrenics disordered thought processes. Gottesman and Sheilds' built explanatory models to explain the disorder's etiology and progression through the interaction of genes and environment.
• "Epigenetics - the control of genes by biochemical signals, modified by the environment, from other parts of the genome" - could this be worded more clearly?

Hope this isn't confusing! I'm trying to be helpful but I don't have the time right now to look at the sources. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)