Talk:Peter Edwards (historian)/GA1

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Krishna Chaitanya Velaga in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 11:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)Reply


Will get to this shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

  • Lead and infobox;
    • Remove the year of the awards, they are just messing up the infobox. The award names are pretty long.
      • I respectfully disagree. While the award names are long, the year of award adds little space-wise and helps track certain periods in Edwards' career. The use here is also consistent with a number of similar articles. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Section 1;
    • 1937–49 -> 1937–1949, per MOS:DATERANGE
      • Is this in reference to the book? If so, the shortened year range is the official title. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Section 2; all good
  • Section 2.1;
    • Crises & Commitments received a somewhat contentious reception
      • I think the qualification is warranted here as the book was not completely contentious, but there was objection to it from some. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
    • H.T. Priestley -> H. T. Priestley, per MOS:INITIALS
  • Section 2.2;
    • 1996–98 -> 1996–1998, per MOS:DATERANGE
    • 2002–08 -> 2002–2008
  • 30.6% confidence, but I understand that these are the book titles. Violation unlikely. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Excellent article, very well written. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much for the review, Krishna. It is much appreciated. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 06:02, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Reply