Talk:Anthracite coal strike of 1902/GA1

Failed "good article" nomination
First, I would like to congratulate the editors involved on choosing a good topic and getting off to an excellent start. While I failed this article, I think it can be improved over time with a little effort to meet the criteria.

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 10, 2006, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: The only issue I have with the writing is the issue mentioned in the section above this review. The introduction should be two paragraphs that summarize the article. The run-on sentence structure in the introduction is also problematic.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: The largest problem with this article is the wholesale lack of in-line citations. This is admittedly my first review, but I checked other candidates with reviews and see no chance for this article to make the status without at least one appropriate in-line citation per section. It would be preferable to have one in-line citation per paragraph.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: I am not aware of any major details that are missing in this article. It does an excellent job of setting out the context of the strike in light of prior strikes.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: The article does a good job with this matter. I do not get a feeling of bias, which is commendable because this article would definitely lend itself to advocacy.
 * 5. Article stability? There are no issues here.
 * 6. Images?: The use of appropriate images is wonderful.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Erechtheus 20:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)