Talk:Healthcare in Finland/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 00:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have comments up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 00:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

While I see that quite a bit of work has gone into this article in the past few days, it needs quite a bit of work to be of GA status. The issues revolve mainly around sourcing and coverage, but there are also other niggles:


 * There is still a significant amount of information unreferenced, including opinions and statistics. These include, for example, the Health financing and Private sector sections.
 * Ref #5 (World Factbook) only covers the second sentence of the paragraph that it is supposedly sourcing. It does not cover "Due to public health interventions and progress in medical care there have been remarkable improvements in life expectancy in Finland over the past few decades.", which really needs a reference.
 * Ref #18 (Miehet kuntoon!) is a dead link. This makes the Health education section effectively unsourced.
 * Many references are missing basic information, such as publishers and access dates. References in languages other than English should specify the language.
 * Reference placement should either be directly after (the most common) or directly before the punctuation. Either one or the other should be chosen and there should be no spaces between the reference and the punctuation.
 * The lead should be a summary of the information in the body of the article and include no information that is not given and expanded upon in the body. So, for example, I see the information on communicable diseases and the aging population in the lead, but can't find anything about it in the body of the article.
 * Section headers should have the first letter of the first word capitalized and the rest of the letters (i.e., the first letters of all successive words) lower-case, unless they are a proper noun. So, "Health Education" would become "Health education".
 * I see nothing about the history of healthcare in Finland. Did they just get hospitals in the last 10-15 years? What was healthcare in Finland like in the 1800s? the 1950's?
 * Pharmaceuticals section, update the electronic prescribing information. It is almost 2012 - has this been implemented? What was the reaction? Were there any unforeseen benefits or problems?
 * Flow is an issue in the article. There are a lot of short, choppy sections with little to tie them together. The article should read like a fairly coherent description; instead, at the moment, it feels like a bunch of different sources were thrown together, each mostly in their own section, with little thought to how each piece of information tied to all of the others.

Because of the number and seriousness of several of these issues, I am going to have to fail the article's nomination for GA status. I believe that the work needed to address the above issues is best done outside of the normal GAN hold period. Once the issues above are addressed, the article is welcome to be renominated at WP:GAN. Please let me know if you have any questions, Dana boomer (talk) 00:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)