Jump to content

Talk:Alice Tangerini/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs) 10:25, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    "an essential mentor" reads a little drive by? "Tangerini primarily does her illustrations in the United States National Herbarium,[2][3] and worked under American botanist Warren H. Wagner." may work better without the tense jump. "As of 2015" what is its current status?
    I have trimmed down "an essential mentor" to just "her mentor". The tense shift is needed in the sentence as (at least to the best of my knowledge), she no longer works under Wagner as he died. For the third question, I could not find any updates regarding the project in question. Aoba47 (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. 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:
    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:
    Seems like every source is reliable and every statement backed by a reliable source.
    C. It contains no original research:
    "Best known for" does not seem to be explicitly sourced anywhere. With the caveat that I cannot read every source: The "six hours" in the source only refer to one specific session seems like. Not sure that "She also serves as a board member on the American Society of Botanical Artists" and the "groundbreaker" quote are supported by the source.
    I have removed the "best known for" part from the lead. I have added a new source to support the "board member" bit. The groundbreaker part is support in the source through the image caption. Aoba47 (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    Assuming that there are no reliable critical sources, that is.
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. 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:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: