Talk:Samuel Frickleton/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs) 16:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start this in a day or two.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

good article! I've made some minro tweaks and you can see them here The most ambitious one was moving a sentence from the 4th paragraph of Military to the fifth. Please check that to make sure I didn't screw up citations, etc. In terms of content, it belongs with 5th paragraph, but in terms of citations....?

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

@Auntieruth55:, thanks for the review, much appreciated. Your changes all check out OK, no disrupted cites. However, for consistency with other articles for the NZ VC winners that I have worked on, I have reverted your change to the first paragraph of the lead. Instead, I have added a further sentence to the first paragraph which I believe goes some way to achieving the intention behind your own edit to the lead. Happy to revise and/or discuss further if needed. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! much improved. Passed. auntieruth (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]