Talk:Ned Breathitt/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Lots of short paragraphs in the body of the article. Not a huge deal, but would make for smoother reading if some of them were combined.
 * Lead "serving from 1963 to 1967. After serving". Repetition.
 * Early life, "joined the law firm of Trimble, Soyars, and Breathitt." Did the law firm include the Breathitt name before he joined (was there a family member there?) or was the name added when he joined?
 * Breathitt's quest for a revised state constitution is mentioned several times. However, it's never described what he wished changed in the document. Would it be possible to include a brief mention of this, or would that be getting way off topic?
 * Later life and death, "law firm of Wyatt, Tarrant, and Combs." Is this Combs any relation to the governor that Breathitt worked under?
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

This is a great article, and I am passing it to GA status. I had a few comments and questions as I was reading through, but they are all very minor, picky things and more FAC-worthy than GAN-worthy, so I am not asking that they be resolved before passing this article. Nice work on another entry in the Kentucky governors series! Dana boomer (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2010 (UTC)