Talk:Richard Neal/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: No dabs.
Linkrot: No dead links. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Neal has long been speculated as an eventual frontrunner...' is not good prose.One of Neal's longstanding legislative priorities is to simplify the tax code. Who says - attribution in the text required.He successfully pushed in 1998 to exempt a child tax credit from being affected by the AMT, and in 2001 Congress made it permanent at his urging. Clarify what the it is.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
The PDFs referenced in 1-15 and 38 are large documents so need page numbers.The books when referenced in footnotes need page numbers for the particular cites.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Broad and focussed.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
Does everyone love him - are there no critics?
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
File:Ma02 109.gif should have a caption such as "Second U.S. Congressional district of Massachusetts in the 109th Congress"
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
OK, on hold for seven days for the above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)- OK, thanks for fixing those issues. If you want to take this to WP:FAC, page numbers are essential as they allow the cites to be quickly found. I am happy to list this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. There's not much in the way of published praise or criticism, so I tried to follow the lead of FAs like John McCain and Barack Obama and focus on events rather than opinions. But I made a few changes. The book references are only two pages long so I don't think individual page numbers are necessary. —Designate (talk) 15:52, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: