Talk:Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement

Connecticut Mid‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of North America Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 22, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 24, 2011.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the legal basis for the largest casino in the world derives in part from a violation of the U.S. federal Nonintercourse Act (1790) and a state statute lobbied for by Mothers Against Drunk Driving?

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 00:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this shortly. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the following edits to this article.[1] Any objections? MathewTownsend (talk) 02:54, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise, the article is concise but accurate and clear. I have evaluated the article. I have AGF the citations. Very interesting article, covering a subject I knew little about. Thank you. MathewTownsend (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just two things. First, there should be an n-dash between the dates (you were right that a m-dash was wrong). Second, as to Tureen, I replaced your parenthetical with a more specific one. Savidan 06:23, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

A few more nitpicks: (R-CT), (D-CT), (R-ME) - should these be spelled out for the non American?

non-Indian gambling - should this be "non-Native American" gambling?

MathewTownsend (talk) 18:10, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
Clear because it's concise for such a complex topic

B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
I added slightly to the lede
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Provides references to all sources:
AGF off line sources

B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Main aspects are addressed:

B. Remains focused:
Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I made a few more edits which you are free to change.[2]
I am passing the article with confidence that you will address the above small nitpicks appropriately, as they are not enough to hold up the article. I have noted them on your talk page.
Congratulations, MathewTownsend (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. I prefer not to spell out states/party affiliations. The text of the article makes clear we are talking about Congresspeople. I think non-US readers will have to follow the link if they want a lesson on US politics. As for Indian vs. Native American, both are acceptable and I use them interchangeably. Savidan 19:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]