Talk:Lawrence H. Keeley/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 21:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Picking this one up. Review to follow... Hawkeye7  (discuss)  21:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * Do we know what the H stood for in his name?


 * Consider uploading a Fair Use image of him.
 * Add full name to the first paragraph. I know it is repetitive, but otherwise it is unsourced.
 * the infobox says he got his MA from Oregon, but this is not in the article.
 * Add alumni of University of Oregon to the categories
 * And University of Chicago faculty
 * His thesis is in the infobox but not the article. Add it to the article.
 * Do we know who his PhD supervisor was?
 * Link microwear analysis, lithics on first use in the body
 * Link hominid, stone tool
 * Decapitalise the "P" in "Paleolithic archaeology", A in "Microwear Analysis"
 * "Lawrence Keeley" -> "Keeley" after first mention
 * "Toth later ... but later" Can we avoid one use of "later", perhaps with a different word, to avoid this awkward repetition, where the same word has two contexts in the one sentence?
 * "saw other ways to challenge Keeley's "peculiar view" of anthropology" Like, for example?
 * fn 14: Do we have a doi or ISSN?

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria A solid article. Meets GA standard although I have some issues minor listed above.
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * 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:
 * 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):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 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 non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * No images
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 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 non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * No images
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail: