Talk:Middle ear myoclonus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Middle ear myoclonus is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by Nehemiah McAfee (talk) at 03:21, 4 April 2026 (UTC) This article is ready to be reviewed in accordance with the good article criteria. Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review the article and decide if it should be listed as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and then save the page. See the instructions. |
 | Middle ear myoclonus was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
GA review
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Middle ear myoclonus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Nehemiah McAfee (talk · contribs) 03:21, 4 April 2026 (UTC)
Reviewer: LetmeEditit (talk · contribs) 17:01, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
Excellent article! I see nothing wrong with this (although, this is my first review, so take it with a grain of salt). It meets all criteria, and has good prose. I didn't know this condition existed, and know I feel I have a good knowledge of the subject. I think you should nominate this for featured article.
Did you know nomination
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. Track your hook after promotion. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected, closed by Viriditas (talk) 00:59, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- ... that the smallest muscle in the human body can sometimes produce odd sounds inside the ear in a rare condition called middle ear myoclonus?
- Source: "In the case of the MEM syndrome, myoclonus involves the middle ear muscles – the stapedius muscle and/or the tensor tympani muscle. Patients usually describe it as a particularly bothersome “clicking” or “buzzing” sound" (https://otorhinolaryngologypl.com/article/549606/en)
- Reviewed:
Nehemiah McAfee (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2026 (UTC).
See my comments on the article talk page; unfortunately, I don't believe the GA review was sufficiently detailed to meet the requirements. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:31, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
GA nomination
Hi LetmeEditit and Nehemiah McAfee! Hope you are both doing well :)
I came across the DYK nomination, and unfortunately, I don't think this article is at good article status. One of the requirements is that the reviewer perform a spot-check of a sample of the sources in the article to verify that each source supports the text in the article that it covers, and that no copyrighted material has been added to the article from the source
, which was not done (as far as I can see). Additionally, running a copyright violation scanner picks up on some phrasing that was copied verbatim from the source, which is a violation of our policy against plagiarism (and GA criteria 2d). I haven't looked further, but there might also be more issues.
I've closed the DYK nomination, but the GA review should be redone, too. LetmeEditit, would you consider get a GA review mentor? I think they could teach you how to do a complete GA review on this article, and you'd get to have some fun learning a new skill! Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:29, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- My bad! I thought I looked over that page in great detail, but somehow "This must include a spot-check of a sample of the sources in the article to verify that each source supports the text in the article that it covers, and that no copyrighted material has been added to the article from the source." escaped my notice (of course, seemingly the most important part of the criteria is the only part I missed, doh!). Thank you for addressing this in a forgiving manner. I might wait a while before my next attempt at a review, but I'll heed your suggestion of a mentor. Let Me Edit It (talk) 12:45, 11 April 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for ensuring a thorough GA review. I would like to say that nothing was copied from the sources verbatim. The copyright violation scanner you linked here does not suggest that. It highlighted the names of the muscles and condition itself, which is unavoidable. There is only one line highlighted that wasn't related to terminology that mentioned "minimally invasive treatment option for middle ear myoclonus," which is common phrasing and wasn't associated with the inline citation of the highlighted text. Regardless, I will rephrase the line to avoid further issues during the spot-check. Nehemiah McAfee (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- That was indeed the line I had concerns about; I wasn't worried about copying proper nouns. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:00, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- The line should be acceptable under wiki's rules as listed in the plagiarism article you linked:
- use of common expressions and idioms, including those that are common in sub-cultures such as academia;
- phrases that are the simplest and most obvious way to present information; sentences such as "John Smith was born on 2 February 1900" lack sufficient creativity to require attribution.
- The phrase "minimally invasive treatment option" is a common expression in academic research, and this was simplest way of introducing the procedure. I have modified the line in hopes that it will streamline the GA renomination process though. Thank you again. Nehemiah McAfee (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
- The line should be acceptable under wiki's rules as listed in the plagiarism article you linked:
- That was indeed the line I had concerns about; I wasn't worried about copying proper nouns. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:00, 12 April 2026 (UTC)