Talk:Łucja Frey

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Jimfbleak in topic GA Review
Former good article nomineeŁucja Frey was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 23, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 20, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Łucja Frey (pictured) is considered to be one of the first female academic neurologists in Europe?

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Łucja Frey/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

OK, comments to follow soon. jimfbleak (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

For starters, the publications and the references are not formatted correctly and are often incomplete. If you are not sure what you are doing, use the citebook or citejournal templates

  • example Bennett JD. The woman behind the syndrome: Frey's syndrome--the untold story. Journal of the history of the neurosciences. 2 (3): 139–44 (1994). PMID 11618815 should be Bennett J. D. (1994) "The woman behind the syndrome: Frey's syndrome--the untold story." Journal of the history of the neurosciences 2 (3): 139–44 PMID 11618815
  • The non-English publications should state the language
  • Some refs lack full details (page numbers, publisher etc.)
  • Journal names should be written out in full
  • Some of her publications look as if they are the same article published in different journals.
  • ref numbers do not always follow punctuation. Multiple refs should have their numbers in ascending order
  • what does As cited in Dunbar et al. (2002) and similar mean? If they are not real references you have actually used, take them out and just leave the real ones. If they are genuine, list them as proper refs with full details

There will be further comments, but I'd like to see the major formatting problems sorted before we continue jimfbleak (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm going to have to fail this, since even the referencing problems have not been addressed jimfbleak (talk) 15:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply