Talk:Paracetamol poisoning/GA1

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

Hi, I will be reviewing your article for GA. So far, I have looked through it and cannot find anything wrong. It all seems fine and very well written and referenced. If I find something, I will post comments below. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 00:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I have looked through the article and made a few edits for typos and such. The article seems very good to me, and there is nothing I can suggest, except that you expand it and fill it out if you intend to go for FAC.
 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Congratuations! A nice article. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 03:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Clearly written b (MoS): Complies with MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced with science-based articles b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable and up-to-date.   c (OR): No original research
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Gives overall setting b (focused): Focuses on topic
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.: Yes
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: