User:Whiteguru/Snow Booth

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 06:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Starts GA Review Page. The review will follow the same sections of the Article. Thank you --Whiteguru (talk) 06:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

 

Talk:Newell Snow Booth/GA1

---

Observations

   HTML document size: 54 kB
   Prose size (including all HTML code): 10188 B
   References (including all HTML code): 11 kB
   Wiki text: 9143 B
   Prose size (text only): 5047 B (857 words) "readable prose size"
   References (text only): 2804 B

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

• Page layout is fine.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

• 9 citations from Shavit do not give page numbers.
• 11 citations from General Commission on Archives and History: Archives Center Catalog do not give page numbers. (Some pages extremely difficult to read)
• The United Methodist Handbook is not a relevant reference.
• Prominent Personalities in American Methodism gives a snippet view which cannot be reasonably read. It is a mention, only, at best.

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

• It is difficult to ascertain. Only one reference is accessible, and that is difficult to read in places.

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

• Page created 1 July 2020
• Page has 36 edits by 10 editors
• 90 day page views = 89, average of 1 view daily.
• DYK on 30 July 2020 brought 2,733 page views
• Page history shows steady development, no edit warring observed.

1. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

• No images on this page.

1. Overall: ✗ Fail

• The references do not conform to WP:VERIFY. In the English Wikipedia, verifiability means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Can't check the major references here. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)