Talk:R. W. Goodman

R. W. Goodman has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 28, 2022. (Reviewed version).

United States: North Carolina Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Low-importance).

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Potential sources[edit]

[1] -Indy beetle (talk) 03:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[2] -Indy beetle (talk) 04:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:R. W. Goodman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 16:33, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
Contains a short description which complies with recommendations.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations.
All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
No original research.
No copyright violations or plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
Neutral.
Stable.
Illustrated, if possible.
Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

I'll be happy to do this review. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 16:33, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Result[edit]

This ticks all the boxes above and so it passes the review. I'll do the necessary at WP:GA. Well done and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]