Talk:Civilian Public Service/GA3

GA Review #3
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''
 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Please consider addressing the remaining issues and pursuing FAC for this article. It's informative, educational, and well-researched.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Generally good prose, although certain usages (e.g. "Friends" to refer to members of the Society of Friends) might be a bit obscure for readers not familiar with those usages. Do have a copyeditor unfamiliar with such work through the article before an FAC.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Almost every paragraph has a citation, and the most contentious assertions are cited well, but it's going to need better citations for FA. I generally use books with cite book sans page numbers and then use rp to indicate page numbers, but I don't think the way you've done it violates the MOS--and certainly not the GA MOS standards.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Great work. If there's one thing more that this article COULD cover, it's what happened to the 1 in 8 who eventually transferred from CPS to the military.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * No issues.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * If anything, it's been neglected!
 * 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):
 * File:CPS31snow.jpg is a bit hard to understand at its thumbnail resolution. Consider enlarging it.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * A few minor issues remain, but not sufficient to preclude GA recognition. Congratulations!