Talk:William Lofland Dudley/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Fiachra10003 (talk · contribs) 23:56, 23 October 2017 (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.	The article reads quite well at this point and has no obvious grammatical errors.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Fine.
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.	Well cited.
	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).	Appears fine; some are not available for me to check.
	2c. it contains no original research.	None noted.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Close paraphrasing from [1] that previously existed has been removed.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	This isn't a problem.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The overly detailed coverage about football games has been clarified.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Appropriate.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No issues noted.
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.	All of the images appear validly tagged.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images were simplified versus the initial GA review.
	7. Overall assessment.	Overall, the article has improved greatly and appears qualified as a good article.