Talk:Forth Valley Royal Hospital/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum 23:21, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article needs some very significant expansion to meet GA criterion 3a (it addresses the main aspects of the topic). For instance, how many doctors/nurses/other staff are employed? Does the hospital have any specialisms? How does it fit in operationally with the community hospitals in its area? What area does it serve? Is it a teaching hospital, or have plans to become one? What transport arrangements are there for patients to reach the hospital? Basically I think this article is much closer to start class than GA at the moment.

A stand-alone Criticism section really can't be justified when it only contains an account of the lack of document storage facilities. This ought to be included in a section on the building itself. How is it laid out? Who was the architect? How long did it take to build? What was on the site before? Surely it ought to be straightforward to get a picture for the infobox?

Although considerable, the work required could be done within seven days if the sources are readily available, so I'm placing this article on hold. Malleus Fatuorum 18:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from John

I took a look at the article, made a few minor adjustments and I think it is looking good for GA. I will think over the next hours and try to come up with more suggestions but for now I think it looks great. --John (talk) 01:26, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well done to everyone who's helped dig this one out, especially the nominator, User:Warburton1368. I'm satisfied that this article now meets the GA criteria. Malleus Fatuorum 14:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.