Talk:Speech-generating device/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 03:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC) Hi,[reply]

This article looks very interesting. I will start the review soon. From what I can tell, looking it over, it seems to be quite well done! MathewTownsend (talk) 03:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

:) Failedwizard (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning review

The article is in good shape and I really enjoyed reading it. I made a bunch of very small changes, mostly of the grammar/spelling type, and added some links. Please feel free to change any mistakes I made. Especially with the linking - I was trying to help myself understand the article.

I have a few comments/questions:

lede

Would it be ok to say "important for people who have limited means of talking" or "interacting verbally" instead of "communicating verbally" - just to dial down the use of communicating/communication?

"users of all abilities" - not clear what this means - perhaps "users with various abilities"? or "users with varying abilities"?

History

Could you give a little more information about the people, like Toby Churchill to give the reader a feel for the people that are using these devices and the experiences they face. Like what their disability is, how they got it, etc. Would it be appropriate to mention the Lightwriter?

How does eye pointing or scanning work? How do eyes provide input, or whatever happens?

"to reduced in size and weight," to be reduced? To become smaller and lighter?

"while increasing accessibility and capacities" - while becoming more accessible with increasing capacity ?? Capacity for what? Increasingly powerful? To access internet and such? Could be worded more clearly.

Input methods

"utterances" - what does this mean? expressions? or messages? outputs? Further down there are some examples. Maybe it would be better to explain these up here also. Is it words, phrases, sentences?

Access methods for speech generating devices

Could you explain a little how switch access scanning works?

General

Why so much mention of the UK and no other country? Are they really in the forefront?

Unnecessary to have a footnote for each mention of Roger Ebert

Could this image be described more fully?

I may add a few more. Please feel free to contact me or ask questions (and to fix my mistakes!)

MathewTownsend (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
I've made some comments which I think you can easily address. I may add a few more but nothing major.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Still have to check but I'm not worried.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Perhaps more explanation could be added, as mentioned above, and some more information about the notable users.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Question about one image, that the caption could be more explanatory. The images are great and very helpful.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

MathewTownsend (talk) 21:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]