Talk:Joshua Lionel Cowen/GA2

GA Review

Unsuccessful. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 21:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Doug Coldwell, I'm going to open GA reviews for all of your remaining nominations and post this identical message on all of them. First of all, they'll need an active nominator, so if you're still around to review them, please let me know by a week from now (10/5). If you haven't, at that point, they'll be closed without passing. If you are still around, *please* check that they will pass source review and withdraw the nominations that will not. Otherwise, that is likely to be the first thing I check and I would prefer not to have to go through all of them just to quick-fail them if I find problems you already know about. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I note that the Jewish Virtual Library is defined as a generally unreliable source.Gusfriend (talk) 07:59, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Coldwell: I'm planning to close this soon (on the 5th) if there is no response. Let me know if you are around to respond to comments, and if so please check them for issues as mentioned above. —Ganesha811 (talk) 10:27, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as unsuccessful due to nominator non-response. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:19, 5 October 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.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
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.
	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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.