Talk:Kenneth Nichols/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk) 03:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Progression
[edit]- Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
- Version of the article when review was closed: [2]
Technical review
[edit]- Citations: no errors found
- Disambiguations:
Couple found (Atomic Energy Commission, Department of Defense, and one redirect which points back)- [3] - Linkrot: Ext links all work - [4]
- Alt text: Images all have alt text (although this is not a requirement for GA anyway) - [5]
Criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- Overall no major issues and I believe I have corrected any typos.
The last para in the 'Post War' section is a little repetative though, as you use 'Nichols' to start the first three sentences... maybe reword a little?Anotherclown (talk) 04:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain':
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- An excellent article IMO.
Just the dab links and a few very minor prose tweaks required.Anotherclown (talk) 04:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)- Done. Fixed the dablinks. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Too easy, looks good to me. Happy to pass. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)