Talk:Esophagus/GA2

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Right, I will take a look and review as I (a) have not significantly edited the article and (b) gave it the once-over previously (which I had completely forgotten!) so some economy of work...comments to follow. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)


 * You don't want a single sentence para in the lead. I think that one could add some info on symptoms to that third para-sentence.
 * ✅ added some information about symptoms --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Overall, looking goof - prose is engaging. Some of the bottom sections are a bit choppy (I rejigged the invertebrates section). I think we are just about there comprehensiveness-wise. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 *  Many blood vessels serve the esophagus, [with blood supply varying along its course]. - bracketed bit doesn't really add anything to sentence. I'd remove it. The sentence left is pretty short so I'd end it with a colon to segue into the list of arteries.
 * ❌ I want to highlight (unlike many organs) that the blood supply is quite different along its course. I can't think of another adequate way to rephrase this that conveys this information. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok good point. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:45, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * In the Development section, I think para 3 would go better after para 1 (?)
 * ✅ I've reworded the section and integrated paragraph 3 into the other paragraphs - let me know what you think. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Esophageal candidiasis is a fairly common problem in immunocompromised people and I would mention it in the Esophagitis section
 * ✅ good catch --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 *  In the canine and ruminants, however, it is entirely striated to allow regurgitation to feed young (canines) or regurgitation to chew cud (ruminants). - presume you mean the first "canine" to be plural...would be good to link these words here
 * ✅ linked --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 *  a human body would not be able to pass through the esophagus of a whale, which generally measures less than 10 cm in diameter, although in larger baleen whales it may be up to ten inches when fully distended. - consistency with units needed.
 * ✅ --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * There is available an extensive rostrum on the anterior part of the esophagus in all carnivorous gastropods. - not really sure what this means...
 * not sure myself and I can't find the citation that the reference uses. I don't feel like I can pass by this opportunity to mention carnivorous snails and slugs though, so I've linked rostrum and simplified the sentence a little.--Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Earwig's copyvio is clear.
 * ❌ I presume this is an automated copyright check - I can't find any record of Earwig editing the article nor any plagiarised sections on google searches. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, I should have explained - it is this Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:50, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for taking this up, . For reasons I've emailed you (very good reasons :)! ) I'll be taking a holiday until July 20th. I'll respond to your review then. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:15, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking this up! I'm back and will get to the review over the weekend. --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, ready when you are. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * @ done. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Looking again, I realise the article does not have an etymology section, such as in Cervix - all material in lead should be in body of article. Also we can put colloquial terms and synonyms. Maybe some historical/old english or something too. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:50, 24 July 2016 (UTC) My bad, I forgot about History section. Let me read it again....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:52, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * @ how's the review going...? --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:18, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hang on, been busy. Now sitting down with a nice cup of coffee and reading again....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:42, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok, reading through again, it sounds odd saying it consists of a fibromuscular tube - I mean, it is fibromuscular tube. But then that sounds funny. Maybe something like, "The esophagus (American English) or oesophagus (British English), commonly known as the food pipe or gullet, is an organ in vertebrates that conveys food  from the pharynx to the stomach. It is a fibromuscular tube that is around 18–25 centimetres long in humans.", then mention peristaltic contractions after the sentence about the epiglottis.
 * ✅ how is it now? --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Also reconcile lede (18-25 cm) with body of article (25 cm)
 * ✅ --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * link foregut
 * ✅ --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Otherwise, I think we're there. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:00, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * @ ✅ --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

1. Well written?:
 * Prose quality:
 * Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
 * References to sources:
 * Citations to reliable sources, where required:
 * No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:
 * Major aspects:
 * Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
 * Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?
 * No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
 * Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: - ok, we're there. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)