Talk:James Francis Dwyer/GA1
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Argento Surfer in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Argento Surfer (talk · contribs) 16:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
All of my suggestions are open to discussion. Once complete, I will claim this review for points in the 2018 wikicup. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- These are my copy edits. If you disagree with any of them, we can discuss.
- Looks great; much appreciated.
- "The sentence was considered to be extremely" - whose opinion is this? It should be attributed inline or rewritten as "The sentence was extremely"
- Two sources have considered it to be extreme. I've just rewritten it as you suggested though.
- "He relocated to New York the following year," - is this New York City, specifically?
- Yep that's right. I've clarified this now.
- The lead doesn't seem to include anything from the Legacy section. I think the fact about him writing 1000+ short stories AND/OR him being the first millionaire Australian writer are worthy inclusions.
- Done.
- These are my copy edits. If you disagree with any of them, we can discuss.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- no concern
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- no concern
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
- no concern
- C. It contains no original research:
- The birthdate isn't cited.
- I've placed a citation in the infobox.
- The birthdate isn't cited.
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- no concern
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- no concern
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- no concern
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- no concern
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- no concern
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- I added alt text for the Argosy cover.
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- This is in good shape. There are a few minor points that need to be addressed, but otherwise this one's ready to pass. FYI, I will be offline until Monday, June 18. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your review Argento Surfer. I think I've addressed all your concerns. let me know if you have any more. :) Freikorp (talk) 09:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Everything looks good. Happy to pass this one. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your review Argento Surfer. I think I've addressed all your concerns. let me know if you have any more. :) Freikorp (talk) 09:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- This is in good shape. There are a few minor points that need to be addressed, but otherwise this one's ready to pass. FYI, I will be offline until Monday, June 18. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
