Talk:National Public Health Laboratory (Sudan)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: FuzzyMagma (talk · contribs) 12:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Reviewer: Snoteleks (talk · contribs) 16:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC) Hello, I will be initiating this review soon.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Well written article all throughout: the sizes of the paragraphs are satisfying and make reading easy, the prose itself and the word choice are objective and succint for the subject. However, within the 'Function' section, "Visceral leishmaniasis" and "Typhoid fever" should be in lowercase, as the rest of diseases are. In addition, there is a missing dot in the lead, where it says "...and research on malaria and yellow fever The laboratory is...". Finally, the meaning of the "HQ" abbreviation from "Sudan Railway HQ" should be explained/substituted with the full name, unless a wikilink exists for the railway itself, in which case it may be acceptable.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   I randomly googled five phrases and only turned up a scam url called "Scientific Computing World", so no plagiarism or original research detected. Earwig's tool also shows no sign of copyright violation. I randomly spotchecked references [6], [27] and [34] and found support for the information that they sourced. All the references seem to be formatted correctly, with one exception: reference [30] starts with "publisher, English." which I'm not sure is correct. I suggest eliminating the parameters "last1" and "first1" entirely, since there seems to be no author available, or perhaps the author can be written as "World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (WHO EMRO)".

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Generally succint yet elaborate, bringing up nearly all of its history and function without unnecessary information. However, something about the 'Directors' section strikes me: between 1973 and 2019, no directors appear. If there is a reason for this, it needs to be reflected in the main text. After re-reading the 'History' section I noticed in fact that the 1973-2019 gap is there too. If you can, please fix it. If you cannot, please justify it somewhere in the text.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   No perceptible editorial bias from my perspective.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No instability or edit wars found.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Although one non-free image is used, as far as I know it is used in this article just like in any other article regarding a public institution: low-res, with a valid purpose, helpful as it is the logo of the laboratory, and complying with Wikipedia's policy. The remaining images are either public domain or CC BY-SA. Captions are suitable.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

@FuzzyMagma: I've put the GA nomination on hold for 7 days to let you, the nominator, address the few issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know when the issues have been addressed. — Snoteleks (talk) 17:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Snoteleks Thanks for taking time to review the article. I have amended for all of your comment except for part of the 1973 to 2019 gap. I narrowed the gap to 1977 to 2014.

The only reason that we have a through documentation for the era before the 1970s is because of Mansour Ali Haseeb's 1973 Monograph on Biological Research in The Sudan, after that the only mention of the NPHL is linked to 2019 Sudanese revolution and the current war, and that is including English and Arabic sources. Probably because these events happened in Khartoum (hence the coverage).

To try and find sources for this gap, I did use the search term "National Public Health Laboratory" "Sudan" "1974" until 2018, and found some sources but really not enough.

I hope what is already included cover the lab history and how it came to exist, and you can consider the time from the 1980s until 2010s as time where the lab just operated as a normal lab, no police breaking in as in 2019 or a biologicals hazarded as of recently. FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

@FuzzyMagma Looks good. I appreciate your effort to find as much as possible information. Often it's sadly not within our reach as editors to be as exhaustive as we want. I'm passing the GAN, congratulations! — Snoteleks (talk) 14:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

@FuzzyMagma Congrats to another of your GA articles! If you still need more sources: I have just added the section Further reading here. Cheers, Munfarid1 (talk) 16:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Munfarid. I will dig through them sometime at the end of May. Sadly things are getting busy in the “real world” FuzzyMagma (talk) 20:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)