Talk:Holby City/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: one found and fixed. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Well written. complies with relevant elements of the Manual of Style
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * References check out, no OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Broad and focussed
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * tagged, licensed and captioned
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I found no issues with this article. It is a little long, but that is not a GA criterion. If you decide to take this to WP:FAC the length may become an issue. Passing as a good article. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:04, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review! I'll definitely keep the length issue in mind before a potential FAC nom. I think this is the article that I've been working on the longest in all my time on Wikipedia - since about 2007 now - and it has grown considerably in that time. I'll try and pinpoint some areas that could be condensed while retaining overall broadness of coverage. Thanks again! Frickative  20:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review! I'll definitely keep the length issue in mind before a potential FAC nom. I think this is the article that I've been working on the longest in all my time on Wikipedia - since about 2007 now - and it has grown considerably in that time. I'll try and pinpoint some areas that could be condensed while retaining overall broadness of coverage. Thanks again! Frickative  20:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review! I'll definitely keep the length issue in mind before a potential FAC nom. I think this is the article that I've been working on the longest in all my time on Wikipedia - since about 2007 now - and it has grown considerably in that time. I'll try and pinpoint some areas that could be condensed while retaining overall broadness of coverage. Thanks again! Frickative  20:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC)