Talk:Jan Dekert/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 13:42, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Initial comments

This one required substantial copyediting, but since it's so short, I don't mind handling that. A few things I couldn't resolve myself are below. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

• "he leased the Theatre in Warsaw." -- is this theatre really just called "the Theatre"?
• "would be proceeded by Józef Michał Łukasiewicz" -- do you mean "succeeded"? Usually "preceded" is the person who comes before.
• Both image tags need to be corrected. The first contains no US copyright information; the second seems unlikely (are you really the copyright owner for that work? The rest of the info says that you scanned it from a book) -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
• The lead is a bit short and could better summarize the article. His pre-1789 life, his deputation to the Sejm, and his "legacy" aren't addressed. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
• Is it correct that he had several children from both marriages? This source, FWIW, appears to say he had 3 from the first but only 1 son from the second. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:31, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • All addressed but the last one, where do you see the specific numbers for children? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

• Shoot, meant to put this link there [1]. Sorry about that. I don't know that this is necessarily a reliable source; I just wanted to make sure you double-checked your source. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:05, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

• Ah, the source itself is not that reliable, but it is based on a reliable book (Zienkowska's, which I used in the article). However, it does not cite page ranges, and I don't have the copy of the book with me. I'd hope this claim is not important enough for us to worry about adding it now, through it would make a nice add-on for some future FA. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:58, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

• Well, if it's okay with you then, I've tweaked the current language of the article so that it doesn't say he had several children from each marriage; if we're not sure of the number, it's probably better to say he had several children generally and leave it at that. -- Khazar2 (talk) 10:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	See above on clarity points. Most sources for the article are inaccessible to me, but comparison to accessible web sources shows no evidence of copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	See note above re: lead
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	See minor accuracy question above
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Comparison to other sources suggests that main aspects are covered.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Image tags need another look--see above.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass