Talk:Columbian half dollar/GA2

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

Reviewer: Tomcat7 (talk · contribs) 11:35, 21 November 2012 (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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

I am passing this article. Here are my two nitpicks:
 * "of organizers of the Columbian Exposition to gain" - how about "Columbian Exposition organizers" to avoid the many "of"s?
 * "Company's Committee on Liberal Arts" - maybe define "liberal arts" --Tomcat (7) 15:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry, didn't see those, will do. A link rather than a def for the second one.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:13, 25 December 2012 (UTC)