Talk:Joseph R. Fisher (author)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 18:44, 24 December 2017 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * I find that, as WP:CITEKILL illustrates, having constant citations[1] will[2] make[3] the [4] article [5] less [1][2][6][7] readable
 * For those of us who don't know anything about the Irish Boundary Commission, some background is definitely needed
 * There is no mention what he did from 1918 to 1924.
 * "This was seen as a grave embarrassment in Dublin." is unsourced
 * I'd try to avoid one and two sentence paragraphs
 * " Ultimately the agreement to make no changes was concluded by the three governments and the Commission rubber-stamped it. The publication, or not, of the Commission's report became a legal irrelevance but remained controversial ever after." is unsourced
 * "Fisher being a Unionist newspaperman, the Irish government seems to have suspected Fisher of being the source." Seems? either it did or it didn't
 * "close to the Swiss Cottage Tube station." unsourced
 * "Finland and the Tsars" (1899). London: Edward Arnold.
 * "The End of the Irish Parliament" (1911). London: Edward Arnold.
 * “Finland” in The Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.), 1911 (in part; with Peter Alexeivitch Kropotkin and John Scott Keltie)" ::Unsourced
 * Overall, more sourcing and context necessary.


 * I'd recommend dividing the Irish Boundary Commission section into smaller sections for readability.
 * Do we know the day of his birth?


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * I'm slightly concerned about the reliability of some of the sources including the first one. Convince me otherwise.
 * I'm slightly concerned about the reliability of some of the sources including the first one. Convince me otherwise.


 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * +is there no image of him available?
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * +is there no image of him available?
 * +is there no image of him available?


 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: