Talk:Presbyterian Church in the United States of America/GA3

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bradv (talk · contribs) 15:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

This is my first GA review in a few years, but this is a topic I'm a little familiar with, so here goes. I'll be going through the following checklist. Bradv 15:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Well-written article, with a clear and thorough understanding of the topic.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Y There may still be some technical terms, but I'm not sure that can be avoided with this topic.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   Y Almost every paragraph contains a reference to a reliable source.

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   Y While there is a lot of detail in the article, it is all relevant to the topic.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   Y No concerns with neutrality. Full coverage is given to both sides of every debate in the history of this denomination, as far as I can tell.

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Y Excellent job with the pictures.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Y Well done. I've looked over the concerns with previous reviews, and they all appear to be addressed.