Talk:Occupiers' Liability Act 1957
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Ceranthor in topic GA Review
 | Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 6, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 covers not only land, but also aircraft and ships? | |||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
GA Review
edit- This review is transcluded from Talk:Occupiers' Liability Act 1957/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: ceranthor 14:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Prose
edit- Looks good overall. A couple errors.
- This is another extension of a common law principle; in Glasgow Corporation v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44, a seven year old child after eating poisonous berries from a bush in a park - he died, I'd assume?
- The berries, which looked like cherries or blackcurrants, were found by the House of Lords to constitute an "allurement" to the child, who found Glasgow Corporation, which owned the park, liable. - probably better with a citation after this
- Both done. Ironholds (talk) 22:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Images
edit- One "infobox" type image checks out.
More later. ceranthor 14:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Much apology for the belated review. I finished reading this the other day, found no more problems, and didn't have time to finish this. It's a sure pass, for a well-written [if boring:] article. ceranthor 00:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)