Talk:Melford Stevenson/GA1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Diannaa in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Diannaa (talk · contribs) 01:04, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
- "Stevenson was Sir Reginald Manningham-Buller's number two" - I am unclear on the meaning here. Could you elaborate what a number two is, or what their responsibilities are?
- " It has been said that the prosecution might have had a better chance..." Can this be re-worded, so it is clearer who said it? I can't access the source.
- B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- Layout is good; referencing nicely done; lead meets requirements. I also checked for dabs.
- A. Provides references to all sources:
- Spot checks reveal no overly close paraphrasing or copy vio; material in the sources backs up the material in the article. I also ran Checklinks to look for dead links and looked for referencing errors; no problems were found.
- B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
- All direct quotations have footnotes.
- C. No original research:
- Opinions are those expressed in the sources.
- A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Main aspects are addressed:
- B. Remains focused:
- A. Main aspects are addressed:
- Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- I've done some rewriting to address your concerns, see what you think. Malleus Fatuorum 02:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- That's much better, and now meets all the GA criterion. Well done, Malleus. Did the man have any hobbies or interests outside of work? Not a GA requirement, but something to think about for FA if any supporting material can be found. Best wishes, -- Dianna (talk) 13:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)