Talk:Bell Tower (University of Portland)/GA2
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 21:53, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I'll pick this one up. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:53, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Looks pretty good. Issues raised in the previous review have been addressed.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- 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:
- 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:
- C. It contains no original research:
- 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:
- See below
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- 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:
- 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:
- 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:
- US is not a free country. Images of buildings are okay, but should be tagged with {{FoP-US}}
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- Comments
Earle M. Chiles, son of Earle A. Chiles
Who was Earle A. Chiles?- @Hawkeye7: Good question. I added a short descriptor and included mention of Earle M. Chiles because he is redlinked in the Earle A. Chiles article likely notable in his own right. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:11, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
the university's religious character
What religion is the university and the chapel associated with?- Roman Catholic. I assumed this was implied by mentions of Marian garden, Chapel of Christ the Teacher, the Latin religious phrase Ave crux spes unica ("Hail the Cross, our only hope"), and commentary by the Catholic Sentinel, but if you think "Roman Catholic" needs to be mentioned specifically, I can try to incorporate this into the prose. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:11, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for taking time to review this nomination and article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:11, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- All points addressed. Updated the image licences myself. Passing. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Hawkeye7: Thank you much! ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.