Talk:Joseph Widney

Joseph Widney has been listed as one of the Natural sciences 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.
Review: May 16, 2013. (Reviewed version).

Joseph Widney received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Christianity: Holiness Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Holiness movement (assessed as Mid-importance).

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Temperance and Prohibition (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Temperance and Prohibition, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Temperance and ProhibitionWikipedia:WikiProject Temperance and ProhibitionTemplate:WikiProject Temperance and ProhibitionTemperance and Prohibition articles

Higher education

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles

Archives

1

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Joseph Widney/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 07:25, 16 May 2013 (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.	good
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead: ok; layout: There are perhaps too many (rather short) sections, which would be better merged or grouped. Perhaps the real estate, LA, and California chunks belong in one chapter (could be subsections). Perhaps a broad 'campaigns and beliefs' section could encompass his environment, religion, and racial beliefs, again as subsections if desired. Family and later years could similarly be grouped. At the moment we have a staccato rattle of level 1 chapters rather than an intelligible flow. Done weasel: no problem; fiction: n/a; lists: n/a
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.	The first book in the list of Books has no author so I guess this is Widney himself? It might be clearer to spell this out, or perhaps to move the title to a list of "Works" if you want to indicate it as one of his achievements.
	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).	no problem
	2c. it contains no original research.	no sign of it
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	It seems so, and appears to be thoroughly researched.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	even coverage throughout
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	no sign of bias
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	no edit-warring
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.	both images are tagged
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	It would be nice to find images of some more Widney properties but no issue for GA.
	7. Overall assessment.	Interesting article about a city worthy.

An infobox summarizing Widney's achievements is not required for GA but could be a good thing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

in process

A number of sections are now given inclusive headers, reducing the choppiness, and the initial image is used for a pseudo-infobox as I did not find a template which made more sense than that. Refs will be fixed anon to make it easier for people. Thanks. Collect (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Author of the first book listed is listed on appropriate sites as the publishing company. Now noted as "(author)". Collect (talk) 14:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Joseph Widney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joseph Widney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525014731/http://www.usc.edu/about/history/ to http://www.usc.edu/about/history/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]