Talk:Georgia Baptist College/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 13:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'll be reviewing this article using the template below. It looks very interesting so I look forward to getting stuck in! Comments to follow shortly. Unexpectedlydian (talk) 13:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JJonahJackalope Fantastic article, thank you for all your work on it :) Some suggestions are in the table below. I'll put the review on hold for now to give you a chance to respond. Unexpectedlydian (talk) 21:56, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The prose is very clear, and I haven't spotted any spelling or grammatical errors. Everything is appropriately explained and Wiki-linked to aid the understanding of readers with no prior knowledge. I will do another check at the end of the review. Final check done. Prose remains very clear and concise. Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead sections As per MOS:BOLDALTNAMES, only the first instance title and significant alternative names should be in bold. Therefore, "Central City College" in the Establishment section, and Georgia Baptist College in the Later years section, do not need to be in bold. Unbolded names in the article. General comments Layout is good, no words to watch identified, no fiction, no list incorporation. Done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	All sources of information are probably referenced and formatted. Done
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	General comments I have reviewed the sources and am content that they are reliable. Background In September 1899, Love reached out to William E. Holmes, an African American faculty member from Atlanta Baptist, to offer him the position of president for this new college. The source doesn't explicitly state that it was Love who reached out to Holmes to take up the role of president (as far as I can see). Is the material in the source enough to infer that fact? Rephrased the sentence to remove direct reference to Love. The source material states that there had been "a man sent to Atlanta to urge his acceptance" (referring to Holmes accepting the presidency). That's great, thank you. Holmes had been the first African American faculty member at Atlanta Baptist and had worked there for over two decades at the time ... Sorry, I'm struggling to find information in the source to back up "two decades". Can you help? The source material states, "Most black Baptists in the state did not believe that Holmes would really resign from ABC after spending more than twenty-five years there". Thanks! Early years ... and by 1908 it employed 11 teachers and enrolled about 325 students. Why "about" 325 students? The source just states 325. Removed "about" from that sentence. The school struggled financially for most of its existence, with one biography of the school stating that it "remained perpetually on the verge of bankruptcy and closure". As this is a direct quote, it would be good to have an author attribution. I.e., with one biography of the school by Willard Range stating that it ... Edited sentence to include an author attribution. In 1914, the school was visited by members of the United States Office of Education, who were collecting information on African American education in the United States. The citation here only includes p.194, but p.195 gives the date of inspection (1914) so I'd include that page in the citation as well. Ref [23] includes pp.194-195. Edited the reference to include the additional page. Legacy A 1951 book published by the University of Georgia Press on historically black colleges and universities ... Is it worth adding an author attribution here as well? Edited sentence to include author attribution. Done
	2c. it contains no original research.	I have checked all sources and am content there has been no original research. Done
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Copyvio detector brings up nothing of concern. Also happy, following checks of referenced sources, that there is no copyvio or plagiarism. Done
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Content that the article covers the main aspects of the topic: background, establishment, history of the college's activities, closure, legacy. Done
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The contents of the article are relevant to the topic and handled with due weight. Done
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Aspects of the topic are covered neutrally. Where disputes are mentioned, these are presented factually. Done
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	This article has a short edit history. The majority of edits are constructive and made by the nominator. Done
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images tagged with copyright statuses. Done
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are relevant to the content of the article. My only suggestion would be that the alternative captions could refer to the subject. E.g., for the first image: A black and white image of the Reverend Emanuel K. Love, shown from the neck up. Edited alternative text for the images. Done
	7. Overall assessment.	Great article! Very happy for this to become a GA. Thank you for addressing my comments so quickly. Unexpectedlydian (talk) 09:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Unexpectedlydian, made some edits to address your comments in the review. Thanks again for reviewing the article, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns, please reach out. Thanks, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 01:08, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]