Talk:Joseph Sprigg/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk · contribs) 17:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

 Comments below,
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): 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 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Issues
--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 17:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It is unecessary to put citations like this: "bbbbbb.[1] cccccc, ddddddd.[1]"
 * Dates shouldn't use "th" at the end
 * Some of the sources require a subscription, please not that with a template.
 * Four citations for one point seems excessive.
 * Tomandjerry211 (alt), all of these issues have been addressed. Please let me know if you have any further questions or comments. Thank you again for the review! -- West Virginian   (talk)  00:03, 27 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Passing, well done!--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 11:14, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Tomandjerry211 (alt), thank you tremendously for taking the time to engage in this very thoughtful review! -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)