Talk:Elmwood (Cambridge, Massachusetts)
Latest comment: 11 years ago by MathewTownsend in topic GA Review
 | Elmwood (Cambridge, Massachusetts) has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Elmwood (Cambridge, Massachusetts)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 22:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Will review soon. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
- review
- Very nicely done. The history, which appears to be a major factor in its acquiring historical status, is well presented.
- One nitpick: "Wings housing more modern services" - I can't find this in the sources. Is there a better word than "wings" which doesn't seem to have an architectural meaning on wikipedia.
- I changed "wings" to "additions". The second page, third paragraph of the nomination PDF documents the exterior changes to the house. (NB one of the additions is described as a "service ell", which I have perhaps liberally interpreted as housing "more modern services".) Magic♪piano 14:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
- I made some edits that you're free to change.[1]
MathewTownsend (talk) 21:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, summary style and list incorporation:
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
- c. no original research:
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- 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!
- Pass or Fail:
- Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 15:23, 6 November 2012 (UTC)