Talk:Alexander Cameron Rutherford/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 16:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * In the The move west section, the last sentence says "and also owned and interest gold mining equipment situated on the North Saskatchewan River." This doesn't make grammatical sense...
 * Early political career section, third paragraph, "on a similar platform of independent support for Haultain has he had adopted in 1898"
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Ref #117 (Territories) needs an access date.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * The photo of John R. Boyle is lacking author information.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall a very nice article. I have a couple of comments on prose and one comment each on references and images, so I am placing this review on hold. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 20:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * All excellent points that I should have caught myself. Now fixed. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Allright, everything looks great, so I'm going to pass the article to GA status. Very nice work and thanks for the prompt response. Dana boomer (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Overall a very nice article. I have a couple of comments on prose and one comment each on references and images, so I am placing this review on hold. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 20:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * All excellent points that I should have caught myself. Now fixed. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Allright, everything looks great, so I'm going to pass the article to GA status. Very nice work and thanks for the prompt response. Dana boomer (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)