Talk:Bronwyn Bancroft/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   This area was the biggest set back. There are several issues. [1]The first sentence needs to be changed. Read the Manual of Style section here and read this article's first sentence to see an example. [2]This article could use some more wikilinks (Canberra, Victoria, Paris, Sydney, Bundjalung people, etc.). [3]"Sally Morgan" links to a disambiguation page rather than an article. [4]You don't need citations beside An Australian ABC of Animals, An Australian 1, 2, 3 of animals or W is for wombat: my first Australian word book. Since she is the author, the ISBN you provided already proves that she wrote it. To be clear, with these three books, the ISBN is the citation. [5]There is no external links section. Bancroft has an official website. At bare minimum, this should be listed there. Click here for the policy on what should be linked. [6]The lead needs to be expanded. Click here for the policy. Her HIV/AIDS work is not mentioned in the lead at all. Something about her activism needs to be written there. [7]Because this is a biography, it would be very helpful for you to add {{persondata}} and an infobox, particularly {{infobox artist}}. Not required for GA, but helpful.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Your references are formatted very well but refs 3, 11, and 17 all have connection issues: "The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.". I think they're dead.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Covers major aspects but the Life and training section could use some expansion.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   I checked against the GA criteria and apparently you don't need images in order to obtain GA status.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I would recommend nominating this article for WP:Peer Review. It looks like it's on its way to being a great article but it could use some Copy editing and some expansion.

   Further comments about grammar (1A) are listed here for anyone who's interested. // Gbern3 (talk) 05:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)