||Excellent opening paragraph had me laughing from early on, linking British public services with Stalinism was a great way to go. The article ran a bit out of steam towards the end though as the gag count dropped - going after the subsidiary channels was a good idea but I think you could have taken it further, extended the lampooning of their stereotypical shows. Everything you can write about the BBC outside of the opening is going to be localised humour to some extent - don't be too afraid of it.
||It's a public service broadcaster! What better concept to tackle? It's localised so I can't give it a 10, but it's a very strong 9.
|Prose and formatting:
||Much like the humour, your prose was excellent in the beginning but dropped later in the article - serious restructuring needed for the subsidiary channels section. Also, the Radio and Television paragraphs contain information and/or references that should be in the opposite paragraph (Television Central mentioned under "Radio", etc). A few grammar issues hither and thither, but nothing to make it unreadable - a careful eye and a quick cleanup is all that's needed.
||Nice images, didn't smother the article and they all worked well in context.
||Avg'd your score.
||This is a very good article. If you take on board what I've said, it could be an excellent one. You probably have a very clear idea of what sections need improvement and how to go about it. If you address everything I've said here in your edit, you'll get my VFH.
||BlackHarrier32 12:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)