Talk:Healthcare in Senegal/GA1

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

Reviewer: Piotrus (talk · contribs) 09:08, 13 June 2013 (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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * It is recommended per WP:LEAD that the lead should summarize the article rather then offer unique information. This lead, however, instead of summarizing the article, does just that - for example the 54% figure used there is not mentioned elsewhere; this continues for most other claims in lead (such as the number of hospitals). 2) My second concern is too few blue links (WP:BTW) and imprecise terms; for example section"Organization of the health care system" mentions "minister’s office" - but we are not told which ministry is it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC).
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Before I devote time to this review, seeing as it is for a student assignment with the principal author and nom not active since mid April, I first want to verify thee's a party interesting in improving this before doing a throughout review. If not, I will have to quickfail it (which would be a shame, because the article seems like a really nice piece of work...). For now I've highlighted a few issues. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Before I devote time to this review, seeing as it is for a student assignment with the principal author and nom not active since mid April, I first want to verify thee's a party interesting in improving this before doing a throughout review. If not, I will have to quickfail it (which would be a shame, because the article seems like a really nice piece of work...). For now I've highlighted a few issues. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Before I devote time to this review, seeing as it is for a student assignment with the principal author and nom not active since mid April, I first want to verify thee's a party interesting in improving this before doing a throughout review. If not, I will have to quickfail it (which would be a shame, because the article seems like a really nice piece of work...). For now I've highlighted a few issues. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Failed, due to no interest from the nominator. Another student-fueled waste of GA reviewer time. Sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:50, 26 June 2013 (UTC)