Talk:Duncan & Miller Glass Company/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aaron north (T/C) 02:12, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Y I have concluded my review. After some light copy-editing this is a fairly easy pass. Aaron north (T/C) 03:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

For this review, I am considering all sources to be reliable except the K and M antiques cite. This is just information written on some store-owner's web site, which is basically about as credible as a blog. However, that source claims that all their information came from what would probably be a credible secondary source, and nothing supported by this web cite is particularly questionable or controversial, so I'm calling the sources and citations good. It may be worthwhile to find a different source for those claims in the future. Aaron north (T/C) 03:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding coverage, I think everything's basically there, there's not much to write about. I wondered about needing a section for the value of collecting duncan miller glass, but when I looked into it, it doesn't look unusually pricey. Pretty nice, but they apparently made a whole lot of everything they made. Also, the article is about the company, so collecting the glass itself would only be a minor part of this article. Aaron north (T/C) 03:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

The following is a list of concerns that I believe need to be satisfied to pass review. If you disagree or believe I made an error, please point that out too. Aaron north (T/C) 03:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• nothing found

The following is a list of other thoughts or suggestions to improve the article. It is not necessary to satisfy these points to meet the GA criteria. Aaron north (T/C) 03:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• It is not necessary at all to cite the same source over and over again after each sentence in a paragraph. For example, if one source covers four consecutive sentences, you can just put it after that 4th consecutive sentence in the paragraph which uses that source. (You probably still need to re-cite if needed for non-consecutive sentences or for the next paragraph) Having a cite after every single sentence when it is not necessary gets to be a bit distracting. (when a reference runs to footnote #ab, that could be a sign that the cites can be consolidated!) This is merely a comment on possible excessive cites. Like the other notes in this section, this comment has no impact on the outcome of a GA review if you really want to cite every sentence.
• Is there a free or fair-use picture of all or any of the Duncan family members who started the company?