Talk:History of Brasenose College, Oxford/GA1

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 19:18, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 19:18, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments

 * Foundation and early history -
 * untitled subsection -
 * The second paragraph is discussing both Stamford and Oxford. I suspect that The Brasenose knocker was taken with them as a symbol of continuity, and .... is referring to Stamford, but the previous sentence seems to be about Oxford. It needs to be clarified where the knocker was taken.

Pyrotec (talk)‎ 20:59, 28 September 2012(UTC)
 * Foundation -
 * A minor point, but in the first paragraph there are inconsistent date formats, i.e. .... 1 June 1509 that the foundation stone for Staircase I was laid.[9] It was not until January 15, 1512....; and there are two short sentences starting: It was on.....
 * It's unclear in the final paragraph what Entrants to the college would have been only 11 or 12, with an intake ... is intended to say. I assumed that it was saying 11 or 12 years old, but it could be taken to mean 11 or 12 entrants.


 * Seventeenth century -
 * Looks OK.


 * Eighteenth century -
 * Looks OK.

....stopping at this point, to be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Nineteenth century -
 * Regency period -
 * Looks OK.


 * Victorian period -
 * The first sentence in the first paragraph is hanging, His successor in 1842 was Richard ..., presumably this was Ashurst Turner Gilbert's successor?
 * The fourth paragraph talks about a Royal Commission of 1851 without a wikilink or explanation. Wikipedia does have an article on the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 but it does not seems to have any relevance here.
 * The following paragraph refers to a second Royal Commission without providing any explanation, or dates.


 * First half of the twentieth century -
 * unnamed first subsection & Inter-war period -
 * These two subsections look OK.


 * Second World War -
 * I suspect that the second sentence Once again, union was Lincoln was discussed: ... should read with instead of was? But what is Lincoln, as the rest of the sentence talks about Brasenose and Christ Church (Note: presumably Lincoln college, as that name appears in the Victorian period subsection)?

....stopping at this point, to be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Second half of the twentieth century & Twenty-first century -
 * These two sections look OK.


 * WP:Lead -
 * Looks OK.

At this point I'm putting the review On Hold. A few minor points need to be addressed, but I would anticipate awarding GA-status quite soon. Pyrotec (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Should be all done now; we don't have articles on the Royal Commissions so I've done my best to explain as concisely as possible. It is a little messy now, but understandable. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Pyrotec (talk) 17:10, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

A well referenced and well illustrated article that has the potential of becoming a candidate at WP:FAC. I'm delighted to be award this article GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 17:14, 6 October 2012 (UTC)