Talk:2021 Oregon Tech strike
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Steelkamp in topic GA Review
2021 Oregon Tech strike has been listed as one of the History 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: April 26, 2022. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:2021 Oregon Tech strike/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Steelkamp (talk · contribs) 07:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I will be doing this good article review. I aim to complete the review within the next few days. If you would like to return the favour, I have several good article nominations right now, which you can find at WP:GAN. Steelkamp (talk) 07:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Good article criteria edit
Well written edit
Verifiable with no original research edit
- I've fixed some close paraphrasing that I found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. Steelkamp (talk) 09:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've checked every single reference. All of them are reliable and match up with the article. Very impressive. Steelkamp (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Broad in its coverage edit
By April 28, the union was accusing the university of violating state law by not notifying temporary workers that they were acting as strikebreakers, though the university rejected that they had violated the state statute.
– The situation appears to be a bit more complicated than that. I suggest you replace this withBy April 28, the union was accusing the university of hiring an outside firm that was violating state law, though the university rejected that they had violated the state statute. The union said that Focus EduVation did not notify temporary workers that they were acting as strikebreakers.
Steelkamp (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)- Maybe should be added that the union compromised on allowing merit based increases. Steelkamp (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Neutral edit
Stable edit
Illustrated, if possible edit
- Licence for the image seems fine. Image is relevant and has an appropriate caption. This criterion is passed. Good to see there is alt text there as well. Steelkamp (talk) 09:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
General edit
Well, I'm putting thit on hold now. This article is very impressive. I thoroughly checked every single reference and found nothing wrong. There is just two suggestions there for criterion three, which should be quite easy to address. Steelkamp (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Steelkamp, hey, just wanted to reach out to tell you that I made some edits to address some of your concerns in the GA review. Thank you again for starting this review, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns, please reach out. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 13:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)