Talk:John Newham/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 18:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this article shortly.--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No disambiguation links found (no action required)
No duplicate links found (no action required)
External links all verified (no action required)
Images tagged with appropriate licences (no action required)
References are in order (no action required)

Prose/coverage/MOS:

Is there any relevant piece of information available for the period after 1987, besides the award presented in 1998?
- Work-wise there appears to be nothing but the company directorship, however there was one other tidbit that I meant to add earlier but forgot -- tks for prodding me, done now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of linking several terms. Please review those and revert as appropriate. Overall, nice article, generally in compliance with all GA criteria. I'd just like to verify that the post-1987 coverage is reasonably comprehensive. Nice work!--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many tks for reviewing mate. Actually I have tended not to link countries (that's a pretty common thing these days at say Featured level, which I think is a good guide) and also I don't usually bother with linked states immediately after linked towns and air bases since the town or air base is the important thing and its article will generally have the state linked if people are keen to see it -- so I'd prefer to unlink most or all those if you don't mind... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Not at all. I did not know this re FA level - but I'll adopt this for further reviews and my own contributions aiming at FAC.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:52, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Tks. Just to be clear, it's still good practice to link countries if it's not the 'current' entity, if you're talking about Nazi, East, or West Germany, for instance. It's also perfectly reasonable to link a state or province, e.g. Western Australia or California, if you mention it in isolation, without a city or other entity linked immediately before. One editor (whom I respect) doesn't even like major cities like London, New York or Sydney being linked, but I think that's going too far... ;-) Basically the test for linking should be if you really think it will put the subject of the article in better context for the reader. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]