Talk:Ecgric of East Anglia/GA1

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Lemurbaby in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lemurbaby (talk) 11:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
  • Please do expand the lead slightly (two full paragraphs would be an appropriate length).
Done. --Hel-hama (talk) 19:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • "The form of the name Sigeberht supports" - unclear. Why?
Hopefully this is clearer - I've made a few changes. --Hel-hama (talk) 20:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  1. B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  
  • For in-text citations, the format is more typically like this:
Lastname (year), p. X
I wish to retain the style I have used already, as eminent Wikipedeans such as Ealdgyth use a very similar style to the one I have used in the article and I have modelled my editing on them up to now. Happy to change if you insist! --Hel-hama (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough. :) No need to change it. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
for multi-page ranges in in-text citations, instead use n-dashes: Lastname (year), pp. X–XX
fixed. --Hel-hama (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • For all number ranges (pages or years etc) use n-dashes: X–XX
fixed. --Hel-hama (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
  • Please replace "Citations needed" tags with citations.
Done, relevant sentence was altered so as to fit in with the citation used, but was still about the cooperation between the 2 Churches. --Hel-hama (talk) 17:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  1. B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    C. No original research:  
  2. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  3. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  • "East Anglia lapsed into paganism" - this is not entirely neutral. How about "reverted"?
Fixed. --Hel-hama (talk) 17:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  1. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  2. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: {{GAList/checkyes
  3. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  

Comments

edit

Excellent work on an underrepresented area of Wikipedia. Thank you for contributing your time and energies! Just a few minor changes above and this will be ready to be awarded GA. Lemurbaby (talk) 12:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)Reply