Talk:Cancer pain/GA1

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

Reviewer: Michaelzeng7 (talk · contribs) 16:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, this is my first ever good article review. I'm going to read this article and see whether it deserves GA status.


 * The article content is good, but I think it needs to double up on images and some infoboxes. It is very well sourced, but the article looks like a drag without images. Since this is my first review, I'm going to ask for a 2nd opinion so I can learn. Thanks! --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The article also is on the Start-Class level at WikiProject Medicine. These combined should limit its GA status. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 02:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Please complete your review including a typo check before requesting 2nd opinion.  Ebe  123  → report 11:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If you need some help, I'm here.  Ebe  123  → report 20:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I think this article fails the good article criteria because:
 * It lacks sufficient image and/or diagrams.
 * It is classified as a Start-Class article on WikiProject Medicine.
 * It does not have an infobox or the like.
 * The content of the article is well sourced, and I can't find any typos (if you can point some out). The article is mainly edited primarily by one person (the nominator) and maybe we should wait a bit before good article? Thank you. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm a little uncertain whether there is anything else I must do at this point in time. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Being reconized as a Start class does not prevent GA status, an infobox could/should not be added, and have you found a (many) good image(s) to be used? Also, only being edited by one person is not a reason.  So if you want, put this on hold for some images and then you may decide.   Ebe  123  → report 01:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Just get some images. Do I do this? --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 01:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Put it on hold for 7 days so that the nominator may fix it.  Ebe  123  → report 20:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the above suggestions.
 * To the nominator or any bold contributor: Currently, the article is in need of images and/or diagrams to meet good article criteria. Thank you. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 20:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, the Lead must be expanded to cover all the summary.  Ebe  123  → report 16:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Lead. I've made these additions to cover drug and "interventional" pain management, and the major ethical obligation and dilemma associated with cancer pain management.

Images. I responded on my talk page but will paste that here to keep the discussion in one spot: Michael, I've just read through the article again and searched Google and Commons for images that might add to the readers' understanding but didn't find any. Sorry. Do GAs have to have a certain number of photos?

Thanks again. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 06:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * There isn't a rule that says there have to be this number of images. There just have to be enough. I'm going to do some searching myself when I have time. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 15:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Consider adding an image at the top of the article on the right? To display prominently. That, and one more image to the article space on the left alignment should be good. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 15:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Why? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I think that would satisfy this image problem. It would be a good article then I presume. Just 2 more pictures. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 15:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. I've found one to illustrate the nasopharynx I'll keep looking. I'm not keen on having anything in the lede, actually, if that's OK. It's a pretty grim subject and I can't think of anything I'd consider appropriate. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:59, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added some chemo bottles. How's that looking? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 17:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Good, now I'm looking for one last image to go with the lead and it should be good. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The problem that is definitely present is that there are not many images that correspond directly with cancer pain. So, I think that your new image is good enough, a good article it shall be? --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

So I think we've eliminated images as a problem, but lets talk about the lead again, the article is quite long, a some 50,000 characters. Through Lead do you really think the lead can be expanded further? Thanks! ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 22:09, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Although it's long, the article only covers a few topics, and I mention each in the lede. I guess I could go into more detail but I personally feel it gives the essentials. Did you have something in mind that you feel is missing?
 * {| class="wikitable" border="1"

! Topic ! Lede
 * Types of cancer pain: illness- and treatment-related
 * Cancer pain may be caused by the tumor itself or by medical interventions in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.
 * Management (drugs, interventional) and barriers to good management
 * Pain can be eliminated or well controlled in 80–90% of cases by the use of drugs and other interventions, but nearly one in two patients receives less-than-optimal care.
 * Ethical considerations
 * Health care professionals have an ethical obligation to ensure, wherever possible, that their patients are well informed about the risks and benefits associated with their pain management options. Adequate pain management may sometimes slightly shorten a dying patient's life.
 * Epidemiology
 * Pain is a symptom frequently associated with cancer.
 * }
 * --Anthonyhcole (talk) 12:06, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Epidemiology
 * Pain is a symptom frequently associated with cancer.
 * }
 * --Anthonyhcole (talk) 12:06, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think one sentence each is enough. The lead should be 3 or 4 paragraphs, so consider having a sentence or 2 for each section in the article, doing a good summary of all of the content. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 00:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's been well over 7 days, the usual time it should take to address issues in the GA review. I think it should be time to close this review. This way, your under less pressure to fix the issues, and you can always renominate it later, when you think it is great and qualifies for the criteria whole and through. I hope you understand, and I highly encourage you to renominate it once all of the issues have been fixed. Thank you! --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 00:43, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions
The lead should be expanded to have 2 or more paragraphs. Also, the article says little in such a long thing, as noted by the nominator, this can probably be fixed. I suggest that since there are 6 sections, there should be paragraphs like this: The Pain section is short, but it covers some stuff, and should be 2 or more sentences long to form one paragraph. The lead should contain information that is already covered in the article itself. Illness-related and Treatment-related go along and should cover 1 paragraph. Management is also big, and should cover 1 paragraph, summarizing everything in the section. Finally, the first paragraph of the lead should summarize the article as a whole, and define Cancer pain in general. Make sure everything in the article is encyclopedic, something you would also expect to find in your local library's encyclopedia, and have a very nice day! Thank you! ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 00:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * P.S. I encourage you renominate the article again when you think its ready. Take your time, you are no longer under pressure to fix errors.---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 00:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your advice, Michael. I've fleshed out the lead, so I'll renominate now. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 04:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * We do not typically label images with number 1, 2, 3, etc. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 13:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)