Talk:Architecture of Scotland in the Middle Ages/GA1
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 19:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Nominator: Sabrebd
I will carefully read this article, and will begin this review shortly. – Quadell (talk) 19:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking this on.--SabreBD (talk) 19:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Resolved issues
|
---|
|
Suggestions for future improvement
- The "Notes" section often repeats the full bibliographic reference in several footnotes. It would be better to place books in a separate "Bibliography" section, alphabetized, with an abbreviated reference to the work and page numbers in the Notes section. See, for instance, the References and Bibliography sections of Adam Eckfeldt or John Sherman.
- Is this a good article requirement or just a suggestion for the future?
- It's a suggestion for the future (or present, if you are so inclined), but it is not a GA requirement. I'm also willing to do this myself (if you agree that it would be an improvement, but don't feel like doing it yourself). – Quadell (talk) 12:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- It would be an improvement to have some sort of tie-things-together sentence at the end of "Background" that introduces the rest of the article, saying that new forms of vernacular buildings, churches, and defensive fortifications sprung up, and giving a hint of how important the changes were. In fact, this might be the same sentence used in the lead section to sum up the background section information.
- I will probably myself before going to FA if that is OK.--SabreBD (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
GA Review List
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- A suggestion for improvement is noted above.
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- All issues resolved.
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- 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:
- This satisfies all the GA criteria, and I'm happy to promote this article to GA status. – Quadell (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail: