Talk:Five Days at Memorial/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

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.

2. 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.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Good focus and covering of major aspects.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Stable. No edit wars.

6. 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.

7. Overall:

   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, Moisejp! You're right about the phrasing, and I'll change it now. 97198 (talk) 05:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)