Talk:Holby City series 1

Holby City series 1 has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 24, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Television: Episode coverage / Holby Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article is supported by the Holby task force (assessed as High-importance).

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Holby City (series 1)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Disambiguations: I fixed one disambiguation link.diff

Linkrot: No dead links found

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
This article is reasonably well written and follows the Manual of Style. I made a few minor copy edits.diff
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
The artcile is well referenced, no dead links, references are reliable sources, no dead links
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Broasd, thorough and focussed
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I am happy that this article meets the GA criteria, so am happy to list it. Congratulations. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your review, and also for the copy edit. Some of the typos that had slipped through were shameful, thank you for catching them! Frickative 15:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Nursing in the United Kingdom#Hierarchy and roles|ward sister]] The anchor (#Hierarchy and roles) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Holby City (series 1). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]