Talk:Isobel Gowdie/GA1

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

Reviewer: Coffee (talk · contribs) 14:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

- please have another look when you get the chance. Thanks. SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * From Section 1: "historians offer differing opinions as to why this should happen"- should it not state "why this would" happen?
 * Done. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * From Section 2: "A little over two weeks later, on 3 May" ... "On 15 May Gowdie was brought" - need year
 * Done. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * From Section 2: "While in that form she was chased by a pack of dogs..." - would be better to say "she stated while in that form" or some such
 * Tweaked. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * From Section 2: "Her first confession described an encounter with the Devil after she arranged to meet him in the kirk at Auldearn at night. Naming several others who attended including Janet Breadhead[c] and Margret Brodie, she said she renounced her baptism and the Devil put his mark on her shoulder then sucked blood from it. Other meetings took place at several locations, for instance Nairn and Inshoch" - None of this is sourced... at least not with direct inline citations.
 * Added some more inline cites. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * From Section 2: "She would have been detained..." - this sentence seems strange in its lack of certainty, but also seems unnecessary in detail if we don't have enough sourcing to back this up.
 * I've left this as is; in the majority of the Scottish witchcraft cases, the sources are based on a lot of informed speculation. I do feel it's important to include the solitary confinement and the very high probability of her imprisonment being in the tollbooth - it is known for certain that it was in Auldearn. SagaciousPhil  - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * From Section 2: "a zealous, impatient man who had a fear of witchcraft and was less reluctant than others to attribute manifestations to magic" - This seems a bit authoritative for one historian's assumptions... perhaps tone down the judgemental verbiage?
 * I've tweaked this a little bit; Forbes is described in another academic source as "not only a religious extremist, but was also obsessed with the threat of witchcraft and believed himself to have been a victim of maleficent magic." SagaciousPhil  - Chat 17:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Hold until issues are fixed. Looks good to go! &mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 18:20, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Hold until issues are fixed. Looks good to go! &mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 18:20, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Overall: Hold until issues are fixed. Looks good to go! &mdash; Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 18:20, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail: