Talk:Glanville Davies affair/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Criterion 1: well-written[edit]

Lead: 1. Size - Pages under 20k should have one single paragraph for a lead per MoS. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]; 2. Grammar - "which resulted greater reform" - "resulted in" is needed here. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]; 3. Phrasing - "and was one of the reasons behind the passing" - "reasons behind" sounds colloquial and inappropriate for legal matters. How about "justifications for" instead? Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]; 4. Over use of the word "which". Alternate other words for "which", including "that". Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Background: 1. Comma needed - "despite this the Law Society " Place a comma after "this". Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]; 2. Comma needed - "and on 18 November McCowan J " Separate out "18 November" with commas in order to denote this parenthetical clause. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]; 3. Clauses - "also saying that Davies" There are too many conflicting clauses. Start a new sentence here and say "Also, McCowan said...". Plus, please state who McCowan is. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation: 1. Grammar - "by the Law Society internal disciplinary organisation,[2] with " The comma is inappropriate. However, use of the comma is recognition that the sentence is probably too long. Try to split it into two. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]; 2. Grammar - "situation, and said" The comma would separate the "said" verb from the "Society" noun inappropriately. Remove. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath: 1. Grammar - "and after pressure from the Law Society and several of the larger regional societies the alternate proposal was used" The "after... regional societies" operates as a parenthetical clause. Denote this by separating it with commas. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I've fixed all the points. Ironholds (talk) 02:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 2: factually accurate and verifiable[edit]

I do not have access to the sources, but nothing seems questionable and the rest can be based on AGF as of right now. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 3: broad in its coverage[edit]

As far as I can tell, it is broad in coverage. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 4: neutral[edit]

The page is neutral as far as I can tell and there are no disputes about content. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 5: stable[edit]

The page does not have any edit wars. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 6: illustrated, if possible, by images[edit]

There are no images. However, it does not seem like it is possible to have any images. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]