Talk:Dallas School District locker room controversy

This redirect is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Oregon

	Oregon portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

I thought the lead section of the article was clear and easy to understand and fragmented, I thought the structure was had several headings and subheading arranged chronologically or by themes which was very helpful, it was also clear, I thought the content was written without bias toward a particular point of view, cited reliable sources throughout the article and as much as possible, and includes citation information from reliable publishers.

This is a well put together article with a good amount of sources. In line citations and wiki links are also well placed. The flow of the article is very good, and it's a perfect length for the amount of information available. You could possibly add more wiki links, although it's not necessary. The introductory paragraph is very well done, and introduces the topic nicely. Overall, I wouldn't change much. i also agree with all the statements made by the above user. LycomingO360 (talk) 20:47, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More feedback

I agree. This is a good start to the article. There are some small re-writes needed to maintain a neutral point of view. -- Sandbergja (talk) 02:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I still believe that this a a very good article well put together and it very understanding and put in fragment to be able to follow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emeraldamartinez (talk • contribs) 15:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Reviewed under new article review process. I noticed that there is a proposal to merge the article. I'm not commenting on that. IMO it fulfills wp:notability and I'm marking it as reviewed..

North8000 (talk) 12:27, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]