Talk:William Smellie (obstetrician)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 09:10, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to review this nomination. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:10, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this article formed part of an educational project and that the nominator has not edited for the past three months, so giving him/her a ping in case he/she looks in! @BaiCaiXue: Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:14, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First reading

The lead is rather short. It should consist of two or three paragraphs summarising the main body of text.
You need to define or explain "uterine dystocia".
You need to wikilink or explain "OBGYN".
There are other technical terms that would benefit from wikilinking.
You need a citation at the end of paragraph 3 of the "Life" section.
The section "Controversy" is somewhat confusing and does not seem to be structured in a very logical way.
Reference 7 (Encyclopedia Britannica) is not correct.

In general, this article is well written and is not far from meeting the GA criteria. I will put it on hold for a week and if no action is taken during that time, I will try and bring it up to GA standard myself. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:40, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Cwmhiraeth

Thank you so much for taking the time to review my article. I am sorry to say that it is hard for me to find time to edit the article and I was wondering if I could have it removed from a GA nomination. Thanks again and deepest apologies for the trouble. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BaiCaiXue (talk • contribs) 08:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator wished this nomination to be withdrawn, but the only procedure available is failing it. It does not fully meet the GA criteria because the lead is too short and the article is insufficiently referenced. If improvements are made, it can be renominated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:46, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]