Prehistoric medicine edit
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I would like a peer review of this article to find out exactly what needs to be improved upon, and where this topic can go in the future (FA?). Comments and suggestions on improvements of all kinds are welcome, and very helpful.
MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments by User:Quadell edit
- Neat topic! There's lots of interesting information here, and it's well organized. Good lead, effective pictures, solid reference format.
- I made a lot of minor tweaks throughout. What's listed below I didn't know how to fix, or didn't feel like fixing. :-)
- Sometimes references are within punctuation[1], and sometimes outside.[2] They should be outside commas and periods, so that needs to be cleaned up.
- Under "Beliefs and ideas of disease", the first paragraph: don't use a slash (or capital) for "skull/head Trepaning". Reword and clean up. Other places have slashes and improper capitalization of disease names, and those should be fixed as well.
- Under "Beliefs and ideas of disease", the second paragraph is convoluted, and also opinion unsupported by the ref. The ref says "Rational treatment was used only on obvious injuries, otherwise spiritual treatment was carried out...", but the article speculates further. I'd shorten that paragraph to bare facts, and combine it with the prev. paragraph. That's not the only part where the text seems to overreach, but I've corrected other examples.
- Under "Disease and mortality" (which I changed from "Diseases/causes of death"), there is no ref for the statements about osteoarthritis and infant mortality.
- I removed other parts of that section that read like promotion for a specific diet, and were not related to prehistoric medicine.
- Many parts say "would have" instead of "did". This isn't a hypothetical past, so the standard past tense is best. I've change this in several places, but I may have missed some.
- I'll do more later. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
<references>