Talk:Lawrence Wetherby/GA1

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


 * 1) Well-written: Looks good. Noticed the following minor problems:
 * 2) *"Wetherby won immediate acclaim". No context. This should say something like "Wetherby won immediate acclaim as governor".
 * 3) *"Several candidates for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination were discussed". Discussed by whom?
 * 4) *"Early in Wetherby's term, the state's revenues were inflated by the Korean War." Shouldn't that read "expenses" instead of "revenues"?
 * 5) *"both whites and blacks". It might sound better to say "both white and black citizens" or something similar, so you're not using "white" and "black" as nouns.
 * 6) *"Beauchamp believed he would succeed Wetherby as governor, so he did not openly oppose Wetherby's actions." Might want to add a "however" in there before the "so".
 * 7) *"he was a delegate an assembly". Probably should read "he was a delegate to an assembly".
 * 8) *Divide your references into "References"+"Bibliography", "Notes"+"References", or one of the similar conventions rather than putting both types in the same section.
 * 9) *References should normally end in periods, although this is not widely enforced.
 * 10) Factually accurate and verifiable: Looks good to me. Virtually everything is cited, and most of the citations are books or articles.
 * 11) Broad in its coverage: Without knowing more about Wetherby myself, I can only assume this article is comprehensive in its coverage. It seems to cover all the major points of his political career at least.
 * 12) Neutral: I don't see anything that appears biased in the article.
 * 13) Stable: Like a rock.
 * 14) Illustrated, if possible, by images: This is a hard era to illustrate. The only advise I can offer is to look at federal photo archives and see if anything turns up. There might be something regarding school desegregation for example.

Reviewer: Kaldari (talk) 23:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)