Talk:Five Days at Memorial/GA1

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

Reviewer: Moisejp (talk · contribs) 06:08, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I'll try to start this review within the next couple of days and finish it within several days. Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 06:08, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

No disambig links. There were two external link problems which I corrected. Moisejp (talk) 04:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Prose, grammar, and spelling are all good. I did spot checks of some of the references and found no copyvios. No MoS issues.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * All the content is well referenced. Spot checks of some sources showed no evidence of misrepresentation of sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Good focus and covering of major aspects.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Stable. No edit wars.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Fair use rationale is fine. Image of Memorial Hospital is free, and has a suitable caption.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

First read-through comments:
 * Overall, a very nice article. One quibble: In the Reception section, the word "praise" or "praised" is used four times. I noticed you used "commended" once, which is good. Other words you could consider for variety: lauded, admired (expressed admiration for), applauded, appreciated, rated highly, liked. Moisejp (talk) 03:44, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I urge you to consider this point, but the issue is not big enough to hold back promotion to GA. I am passing this article. Great work! Moisejp (talk) 04:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ! You're right about the phrasing, and I'll change it now. 97198 (talk) 05:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)