Talk:Carbon monoxide poisoning/GA1

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 09:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 09:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Initial comments
This looks to be a strong candidate for WP:GAN, nevertheless I will carry out a full review before making my decision. Pyrotec (talk) 10:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

At this point I'm just going to concentrate on a few minor points.


 * Signs and symptoms -
 * Perhaps we are splitting hairs here, but the statement "In the United States, the OSHA limits long-term workplace exposure levels to less than 50 ppm" is not true. The OSHA 8 hour time weighted average limit is 50 ppm, and that is clearly stated in ref 8; peak values can be higher, 100 and 200 ppm, depending on the application, are given in ref 8. In Europe, we have a 8-hour TWA limit of 30 ppm (it was 50 ppm). (Note: I will come back to this I want to check some data first).
 * I did a copyedit on the article. Pyrotec (talk) 22:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * '''WP:Lead -
 * I'm not very keen on the statement: "Carbon monoxide poisoning occurs after enough inhalation of carbon monoxide (CO)". Its rather vague, but at present I have not come up with a better solution. Pyrotec (talk) 22:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That a good point, that sentence is not the best, I also have not come up with a better solution, will think about it. M r Bungle |  talk  08:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article. I'm awarding it GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 19:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)