Talk:Marjorie Lynch/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: MaxnaCarta (talk · contribs) 01:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

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 non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Lead

• Linked London
• Changed "American Army" to United States Army, as this is how it's referred to in Early life and should be consistent, also linked
• Linked Washington DC
• Lead is good, no issues. Summarises the body without excessive detail.

Early life

• Linked London
• Linked Paris
• Linked Christmas
• Source to text integrity for first two sentences of early life using ref [1] is good.
• Ditto for first and second sentence of paragraph two
• Linked US Army and changed to United States

Political career

• Source to text integrity for paraph one checks out for the use of ref [9]
• Ditto for [17], [20], [25].

General Comments

• I really struggled to find fault with this one. A few missing links, but this is great work. You certainly practice what you preach about attention to detail and text to source integrity Sammielh! Did not find a single spelling error, and prose is excellent. Learned a lot from you during your review of my work and vice versa. Appreciate it. Thanks! — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.