Talk:SENSOR-Pesticides/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, just setting up page, review soon Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

• Technical check. No dabs, no deadlinks. Images have WP:alt text, but it does not describe the image for an unsighted or partially sighted reader. For example, the fly alt text names the insect, which repeats the caption, but does not describe it. Similarly with the other images, the logo etc need to be described Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

 DoneI wasn't quite sure what ALT text was for. Fixed now.

• Ref check -refs look good, but a query about ref 40. If Harrington is a reliable source, you need to make it clear why Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Gene Harrington is a committee head for the National Pest Management Association. He keeps a list of states that have IPM requirements for schools that he e-mails out to a list of people in federal and state government that work in pesticide regulation. The list isn't available publicly - he sent it to my supervisor. How should I explain this - a footnote?

• See my change to the ref, and check if you're happy with it Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Looks good. Thanks! MMagdalene722^{talk to me} 15:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

• Most of first paragraph of "History" lacks a reference. This is important because it makes significant claims about state and SENSOR activities

I've explained that in the peer review - basically, all of that information comes from the first source cited. Should I repeat the citation for subsequent sentences?

I'd be inclined to move the ref to the end of the text is referencing Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done

• Last sentence of "Case definition" lacks a ref, not so critical, but shouldn't be difficult to find one

 Done

• Several articles have attracted media attention and motivated legislative or other governmental action. If that's the case, it should be easy to reference some

The subsequent paragraphs are meant to explain that. Should I cite sources for that sentence anyway?

• Florida Medfly Eradication Program is capitalisation correct?

Yes.

• Government Accountability Office references seem strangely formatted. I would have expected quotation marks for an article title or italics for a publication title somewhere?

 Done

• No serious problems with content or text. I made these changes to fix typos, avoid repetition of words, or similar minor stylistic issues. Please check that you are happy with these

Heh. Good for the most part, except I think you're probably the fifth person that has changed disinsection to disinfection, thinking it's a typo. "Disinsection" is a technical term referring specifically to the decontamination of aircraft for customs. I changed it back.  :-)

Oops, the hidden text and the stub are a good idea {: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The article is clearly of GA quality, and I'll pass it when the issues above are resolved. Let me know if there are any problems Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:52, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

GA review
(see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Hooray! Thanks very much! MMagdalene722^{talk to me} 15:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure, it always helps when you can see the articles nearly there anyway 17:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)