Talk:G. E. L. Owen/GA1

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

Reviewer: StraussInTheHouse (talk · contribs) 11:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Starting review now.   SITH   (talk)   11:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Criteria
Good Article Status - Review Criteria   		A good article is&mdash;  :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

:
 * (a) ;
 * (b) ;
 * (c) ; and
 * (d).

:
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

. . :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).



Review
 :</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>.</li>

<li>.</li> <li>:</li>

</ol>

Discussion

 * Hi Modussiccandi, review completed. Please ping me back when the "on hold" items have been looked at and I'll re-review.  Many thanks,   SITH   (talk)   12:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the speedy review. I have addressed the points raised in section 1. I have singularised the "Allegations" and done some more research on the issue. It seems that nobody has commented on Nussbaum's statement, perhaps because Owen had already been dead for so long. Still, I've added a reference by The New Yorker which simply restates the allegations. They admittedly use some quotes form Nussbaum (2003) and seem to have talked only to Nussbaum about the issue, but I thought it might be helpful to add a second reliable source. Let me know if anything more is needed to improve the article. Modussiccandi (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, no problem, thank you for the prompt response and changes. The article is has been promoted to good article status.  Congratulations!    SITH   (talk)   19:25, 1 March 2021 (UTC)