Talk:Gunfight at the O.K. Corral/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 20:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
I made a number of copy-edits for style and clarity.[1]

Prose is good, conforms sufficiently with manual of style
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Well referenced, I added a cite to the inquest transcripts, ref #100[2], you might find more here for further development.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Thorough coverage without unnecessary trivia
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Licnesed and captioned
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
OK, this is a pass. I spun off The Cowboys (Cochise County) to provide some background for their first mention. At first it confused me as to why the word was capitalised! You may wih to expand this start class article. I was also confused by the perfectly allowable citation style of putting the page numbers after the cite. You may wish to consider using this style as it is, I feel, clearer. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And the thoughtful edits. Another objective pair of eyes always comes in handy. — btphelps ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]