Talk:Androgen backdoor pathway/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Etriusus (talk · contribs) 05:01, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll review this.

Images:

 * Image rights are in order.
 * The image: File:Backdoor-11-oxygenated.svg is minimized to the point of being unreadable. If possible, set the pathway longways, similar to Pantothenic acid, it's current state doesn't contribute much to the overall page.
 * MOS:CAPSUCCINCT

Misc

 * Wikidata is incongruous with the prose. (optional)
 * Page is stable
 * nominator is primary author

Copyvios

 * Nothing on spotchecks.
 * Earwig flags a few phrases, but these are mostly just technical sentences that really can't be reworded.

Prose notes

 * The lead is way too short.
 * 'as well as other tissue types and processes' specify
 * Clarify that canonical also means "general, ideal, and/or most common" pathway
 * in medical literature WP:Weasel
 * opened new avenues for understanding the biosynthesis of androgens in humans. specify how
 * So, as a whole, the Introduction is serving the role that the Lead should have. You can't have big sweeping statements, such as Understanding these pathways is critical for the development of effective treatments for conditions related to androgen biosynthesis. in an article's body, this is lead material.
 * " finally converted" removed 'finally'
 * leads to early male sexual differentiation how?
 * by even a mild increase in circulating 17-OHP levels awkward to read.
 * '17OHDHP' change to "Referred to as 17OHDHP or 17α-hydroxy-dihydroprogesterone"
 * 'feedstock' WP:TECHNICAL, simplify
 * 'Some work' WP:WEASEL
 * "he steroids 11OHA4 and 11KA4 " introduced out of nowhere
 * " T" please establish what this means
 * This case study emphasizes the role of AKR1C2/4 in the alternative androgen pathways. weirdly formatted sentence, outside the citation technically. Can a causal link really be drawn from only 5 cases? Perhaps softer wording should be used here.
 * The prior sentence "The discovery of the backdoor pathway to 5α-dihydrotestosterone in the tammar wallaby in 2003" Doesn't mention the work done in 2000.
 * The History section as a whole should be simplified somewhat, we don't need a step-by-step methodology, just the high points.
 * The article as a whole never really establishes what the classical pathway is, just a couple of snippets here and there on some differences. That would make an excellent background section.

I apologize but this is going to be a fail from me. I can overlook prose issues but there are entire sentences that are uncited, and the MOS is all over the place at times. This isn't meant to scare you away, trust me, I've had my fair share of failed GAs, this is to show what needs to be improved. I've tried to give detailed notes on what to improve before renoming, if you disagree with my suggestions, I'm more than happy to discuss in the talk page. I wish you the best, don't give up!!! 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 05:01, 3 August 2023 (UTC)