Talk:Histogenesis

Anatomy: Microanatomy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to microanatomy.

Physiology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has not yet been associated with a particular area.

Histogenesis 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 5, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Good article nomination[edit]

I don't think this meets the good article criteria at the moment, but I don't think it should take too much work to make it meet them. First of all the intro needs to be made much more general. Why 'is defined as' and not just 'is'? What is meant by undifferentiated? Are we talking about animals, plants or what?

Second, some sections are only a sentence long. They should either be expanded or merged with another section.

Third, the meaning of the 'production' section is not clear at all. What does the table mean? Also a problem here is the layout - there's an image overlapping the table.

Fourth, the encarta reference does not verify anything in the article, so I'm not sure why it's there.

If these things are fixed I'll re-review it and add it to the good articles list. Worldtraveller 14:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My screen resolution is not of the average computer, therefore, the article looks organized. I will view the article to better understand the formatting issues. Unfortunately, I cannot make the stated alterations until next week, but I thank you for your comments.

-- J.Steinbock ^(Talk)

I edited the first sentence, in part as per Worldtraveller, and can confirm that there is and image and a table in layout conflict. Pete.Hurd 03:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first image in the section titled “Production” overlaps the table in my browser as well. (I use Firefox.) The table can be made fully visible by reducing the text size (by pressing the <ctrl>- key sequence a few times.) However, this makes the text harder to read. --KBlott (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]