Talk:Charles Hastings Judd/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 08:50, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basic GA criteria

Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations.
All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
No original research.
No copyright violations or plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
Neutral.
Stable.
Illustrated, if possible.
Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

For reviews, I use the above list of criteria as a benchmark and complete the variables as I go along. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

With a prose size of only 6.7 KB (1,111 words), this couldn't go far wrong and it does meet all the GA criteria. It's well written and has a good layout with satisfactory sourcing. No style issues, no OR or POV. The lead is adequate as a summary and complies with the guideline but perhaps you could put another sentence or two into it.

The images are public domain and there are no copyvio issues. There is one thing I would say, though, about Judd's photo in the infobox. He looks disconcertingly like Oliver Reed, as Ollie was in the mid-seventies. The article passes GA. It's an interesting topic. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]