Talk:Aurora Health Care

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Aurora Health Care was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 28, 2007 Good article nominee Listed March 25, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted Current Status: Delisted good article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Wisconsin. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. If you give this article a rating or change a previous rating, please leave a short summary in the comments to explain the rating and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. B This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance assessment scale Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject. B rated as B-Class on the assessment scale Low rated as Low-importance on the assessment scale

[edit] GA passed, review

Passed as a Good Article.

1. Well written. Clear language provides an easily understandable grasp of the subject matter.
2. Factually accurate and verifiable. (29) citations to reputable secondary sources. Meticulous even. Good job.
3. Broad in coverage. Covers history, CEO transition, controversy, future plans, great work.
4. Stable, is not the subject of edit wars.
5. Images are both free use, but a note, the second image should be trans-wikiied to the Commons, as the first one already is.

Great job with the article, as a whole. Pass as GA. Smee 20:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] GA Sweeps—on hold

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

The lead should be longer. I suggest two or three paragraphs.

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are being addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, Ruslik (talk) 08:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Since there has been no answer, I am going to delist this article. Ruslik (talk) 10:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)