Talk:Glanville Davies affair/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Ironholds in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Criterion 1: well-written
edit- Lead
- 1. Size - Pages under 20k should have one single paragraph for a lead per MoS. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- 2. Grammar - "which resulted greater reform" - "resulted in" is needed here. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- 3. Phrasing - "and was one of the reasons behind the passing" - "reasons behind" sounds colloquial and inappropriate for legal matters. How about "justifications for" instead? Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- 4. Over use of the word "which". Alternate other words for "which", including "that". Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Background
- 1. Comma needed - "despite this the Law Society " Place a comma after "this". Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- 2. Comma needed - "and on 18 November McCowan J " Separate out "18 November" with commas in order to denote this parenthetical clause. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- 3. Clauses - "also saying that Davies" There are too many conflicting clauses. Start a new sentence here and say "Also, McCowan said...". Plus, please state who McCowan is. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Investigation
- 1. Grammar - "by the Law Society internal disciplinary organisation,[2] with " The comma is inappropriate. However, use of the comma is recognition that the sentence is probably too long. Try to split it into two. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- 2. Grammar - "situation, and said" The comma would separate the "said" verb from the "Society" noun inappropriately. Remove. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Aftermath
- 1. Grammar - "and after pressure from the Law Society and several of the larger regional societies the alternate proposal was used" The "after... regional societies" operates as a parenthetical clause. Denote this by separating it with commas. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Criterion 2: factually accurate and verifiable
editI do not have access to the sources, but nothing seems questionable and the rest can be based on AGF as of right now. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Criterion 3: broad in its coverage
editAs far as I can tell, it is broad in coverage. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Criterion 4: neutral
editThe page is neutral as far as I can tell and there are no disputes about content. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Criterion 5: stable
editThe page does not have any edit wars. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Criterion 6: illustrated, if possible, by images
editThere are no images. However, it does not seem like it is possible to have any images. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)