Talk:Ed Westcott/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 21:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Should be able to get to this in the next couple of days. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Toolbox checker
- No dablinks
- Some EL issues, see below.
Prose/structure/detail
- Reads well, hardly changed a thing in my copyedit.
- I think you could reconsider the necessity of some links, e.g. photographer, camera, newspaper, etc, but not a showstopper.
Referencing
- Links for the following footnotes seem to be dead or dying:
- 1
- 8
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Re. FN11, not sure we're encouraged to use blogs but as I can't access the site I don't know just what it looks like.
Images
- All licensing checks out.
- Format-wise, there is a fair bit of sandwiching from all the pictures so I wonder if shifting a few to a gallery at the end might be better, but again not a showstopper.
Summary -- really enjoyed this one, I guess loving photography as well as history helps... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- I have cut back the necessary links, and removed a couple of duplicates. I would have repaired the link rot early if I had known the article would be reviewed so soon. The links in sports articles have a half-life of just a few months, so they usually decay waiting in the queue. I submitted this one as a MilHist article because I couldn't see an obvious slot for a photographer, so of course it gets reviewed straight away. Anyhow, the sports articles give good practice, I have have repaired them all straight away. Moved some of the images into a gallery to reduce the clutter (and added two more). Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, the links all work and I think the layout is much improved with some images moved to a gallery. Just one last thing, has Children of the Manhattan Project considered a reliable source for other articles? I didn't spot the editorial policy and it just looked a bit amateurish/enthusiast... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)