Talk:George O'Malley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article George O'Malley 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.
September 2, 2012 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Grey's Anatomy (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of the Grey's Anatomy WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia articles relating to the 2005-present American Broadcasting Company (ABC) medical drama Grey's Anatomy. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can become a member, and get more information about it.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Television (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Sex with Callie[edit]

'he has a ton of sex with callie' Doesn't sound right for a encyclopedia -mickiscoole Talk 09:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be longer?[edit]

Shouldn't this page be longer? Every time I come to this page I feel like a lot of information is missing. It doesn't even have information from the last two episodes. It's the shortest out of all the character pages from Grey's Anatomy. Even Callie's page is longer and we have less information about her from the show. We know tons about George but a lot of that information isn't on the page. All the other character pages have a background, overview, and history section. George's just has a character overview. I would add more to the page, but I suck at grammar. Could someone else please update this page to look more similar to the other Grey's Anatomy characters? Rainbow 22:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I've changed the layout to look more like the other character pages, but I don't have time to write out a detailed character bio like I did for Meredith Grey or Derek Shepherd. Someone else, please feel free to come behind me and flesh out the content for George. Also, to the above editor, even if you feel like you're not great at grammar, you can still contribute! There are many editors who tend to just come behind and clean up little typos and things, but if you've the content, by all means add it! DarkandTwisty29 15:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

George[edit]

Nobody likes George because i don't know just people don't like him. I saw in the history in this page and i saw that before this page has Overview and Storylines and History. Why somebody deleted that thing. Could someone explain me? I am user from other Wikipedia!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.29.71.198 (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I know, I know. But if you are so frustrated than why don't you fixed you're self, or better join the project. ---Max(talk) 08:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

US Army Trauma Surgeon[edit]

I don't believe this should be in the character's occupation because the character never actually became a US Army Trauma Surgeon given the events on the show's fifth season finale.

Now in civilian medicine, to be a trauma surgeon, one has to have five years of general surgery training and then take a two-year fellowship in trauma surgery and/or surgical critical care. George is barely a second-year resident in general surgery; how can the additional of 3 years of general surgery and 2 years of trauma surgery/surgical critical care training be circumvented by simply signing up with the US Army Medical Corp?

Despite being under the auspicies of the military command, army physicians and surgeons still practice civilian medicine; so how can O'Malley be a trauma surgeon with only two years training of general surgery? - Ace 11:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:George O'Malley/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 02:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll take this one. TBrandley 02:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Tate. No rush, but if you could try to do this one by Monday; I'd like to recognize C97 in the newsletter. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 03:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Sure, will do tomorrow. Cheers, TBrandley 05:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Infobox: Couple of concerns with the image caption, "Dr. George O'Malley" shouldn't be in bold per MOS:BOLD, and some MOS:CAPS problems there.
    • I think it's okay for a good article per the other GA characters; those MOS compliances are not part of the criteria. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
      • Disagree. It is apart of Creition 1(b): it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation". TBrandley 17:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
          • Exactly. MOS:BOLD and MOS:CAPS are not part of the MOS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, or list incorporation. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Lede: Unlink fictional character per WP:OVERLINK
  • Lede: "expecting only a one". Remove only per WP:NPOV
  • Characterization: The Chicago Tribune → the Chicago Tribune. "The" isn't actually a part of the newspaper name
  • Lots of this article is quotes. Could some/a bit be paraphrased?
    • The quotes aren't too long. The problem is that the article deals with pretty sensitive material, so I feel it would be beneficial to the reader to know what is actually said, rather than a paraphrase. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Ref. 4: Don't SHOUT in references
  • Ref. 10: Use the cite web template
    • Not necessary; even for FAs. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
      • Just to be consistent. TBrandley 17:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
        • Still not necessary for GAs. I think you spend too much time with FAs that you forget that GAs aren't as good :) TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Ref. 10 is missing access date
  • Ref. 13: WP:DASH problems
    • Not a GA criterion. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
      • What's wrong with making the article better? TBrandley 17:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
        • If I want to prepare this article for FA, I'll do that. Unnecessary imposing of non GA criteria does not need to be addressed. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Double quotes (") should be single quotes ('), as per WP:MOS guidelines
    • That guideline isn't mandatory for GAs. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
      • Disagree. It is apart of Creition 1(b): it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation". TBrandley 17:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
        • You're misreading the criterion. It specifically says "MOS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists"; MOS:BOLD and MOS:CAPS are not parts of those MOS's. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Ref. 38 is missing a "The" with "Huffington Post"
  • External links: This article is about the character, not the show. Remove/replace link.
  • External links: Categories should be sorted in alphebitcal order

Great work on the article. I made a few minor edits. On hold for now. TBrandley 17:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

All done or replied to. TRLIJC19 (talkcontribs) 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
More replies above. TBrandley 17:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Looks good now. Pass. TBrandley 17:43, 2 September 2012 (UTC)