Talk:Middle Stone Age/GA1

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

Reviewer: 3family6 (talk · contribs) 03:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * Earwig's tool did not bring up any major findings, apart from a site that links to Wikipedia.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 04:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * "Backed pieces from the Twin Rivers and Kalambo Falls sites in Zambia dated at sometime between 300 and 140,000 years indicate a suite of new behaviours [2][9] Barham [10] believes that syntactic language was one behavioural aspect that allowed these MSA people to settle in the tropical forests of the Congo." - There is some punctuation missing here. I would have just fixed it myself, as that is a minor, inconsequential change, but I'm not entirely sure how these sentences meant to be constructed.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * From "Lithic technology:" "It may have been used from the transition from the Early Stone Age to the Middle Stone Age onwards." - What is "it?" If this is referring to the use of blades, just write "these blades may have been used from the transition from the Early Stone Age to the Middle Stone Age onwards."-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * "Skoyles and Sagan for example argues..." - "Skoyles and Sagan argue..."-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * The article could benefit from some more wikilinks. For instance, in "Regional Development", Blombos Cave, Howiesons Poort, Still Bay, and Pinnacle Point Cave are all mentioned, but not wikilinked.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Only the first word in section headings should be capitalized unless there is a proper noun. So, "Regional Development" should be "Regional development," "Lithic Technology" should be "Lithic technology," "Hominin Evolution and Migration" should be Hominin evolution and migration," etc.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * "...approximately 300 kya, we begin to see the gradual displacement of the large cutting tools of the Achuelian..." - Use of "we" in this sentence and others in the article is not within Wikipedia standards. Having read many history and anthropology articles in college, I understand that this is common parlance in journal articles. However, Wikipedia has different writing standards. Wikipedia articles shouldn't address the reader directly.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In "Evidence for modern human behavior," several theories are mentioned - mosaic, discontinuity, cognitive advances - but aren't explained.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:HEAD, section headings should not contain questions, so "Cultural complexes?" should be changed to something like "possible cultural complexes."-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * "While this may seem unremarkable..." - this is another example of writing that isn't within Wikipedia stylistic standards. This could be rephrased as "These variations are remarkable because... ."-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * All sources use the same format as the following: McBrearty, Sally and Alison A. Brooks 2000 The revolution that wasn't: A new interpretation of the origin of modern human behaviour. Journal of Human Evolution 39:453–563. The only problem with this style is that there should be a period after the author names and publication year, and the article title should be in quotes. If the source is a book, the book title should be italicized.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:
 * Adequate citations to reliable sources. URLs to the sources are not provided (and even so the sources might require a subscription), so I'm accepting them AGF.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * C. No original research:
 * Content is verifiable and attributed to sources.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * Covers the major aspects.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * B. Focused:
 * Stays focused on the Middle Stone Age.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Neutral, presents all major views.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * Back through early 2011, there have been a few instances of vandalism or otherwise disruptive editing, but this was quickly resolved, and no edit wars occurred. Overall, a quite stable article.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 04:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * All images are released either to public domain or else for free re-use and modification under Creative Commons.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 04:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * Relevant images captions.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 04:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall: Still needs some work on the prose.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 18:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thank you,, for taking on this article. You have addressed all of the problems that I found.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me   &#124;  See what I have done  ) 16:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks to you, too,, for the review!! Ninafundisha (talk) 05:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)