Talk:Three-cent nickel/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Andrew Gray (talk · contribs) 20:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Not a numismatist, but always enjoyed these series of articles. Review to follow. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- There's a few niggling details but I'll deal with these separately; certainly not enough to fail it. All very readable even if I balk at a couple of the commas :-)
- B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- Solid lead; sensible layout; no problematic terms; no fiction; no lists. One block-quote is unfortunately lost because of the images on both sides (Carothers, in "Inception") but otherwise visually good. The images feel a little concentrated in the early sections, but I'm not sure there's much that can be done about that given the subject matter.
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- References all look suitably reliable. (FYI, the two Google Books links are unavailable to non-US users; unfortunately, they're not on archive.org either)
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- No unsourced claims
- C. No original research:
- No signs of original synthesis, and the points where sources disagree are signposted.
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- All major aspects seem covered. "Design" feels short, simply because it's surrounded by long sections, but it says all it needs to say.
- B. Focused:
- There's a lot of historical context, but necessary for the article.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- I'm not seeing any spin here.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Happy to pass this with no qualms. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
