Talk:Rebecca Harding Davis/GA1

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

Reviewer: Maclean25 (talk · contribs) 01:45, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Good article review (see What is a good article? for criteria)

I will continue the review if there is work done to address these above notes. If there is no response, I will fail the article. maclean (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2011 (UTC);
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 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):
 * Four public domain images used File:Rebecca Harding Davis.jpg & File:Richard Harding Davis 7.jpg & File:Warrick.jpg & File:Silhouettes Davis.jpg
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Comments:
 * I understand this is part of a class project: User:Profhanley/teaching/literature of labor.
 * Replace the [citation needed] tags with citations to the reference used to obtain this information, as noted abover (Talk:Rebecca Harding Davis)
 * There are 2 stray urls in the Notes section. Were they used as references, if so provide citations to show where they were used.
 * You can properly (and consistently) format the references using the cite templates, like cite journalcite book cite web, like this.
 * 2c. "most likely brought in for her brothers" - this is speculation and needs to be attributed to a reference. Either remove it or add a citation.
 * 2a/b. ''"...regarded by many critics as a pioneering document marking the beginning of Realism in American literature.[5]" - this reference only gives the opinion of one critic, not many.
 * 2a/b. ''"is widely considered Rebecca Harding Davis’ most significant work.[5]" - this reference only gives the opinion of one critic, which does not translate into 'widely considered'.
 * 2a/b. What is this reference? "Davis, Rebecca Harding, 1831-1910." Literature Online. ProQuest, 2005. Web. - is Literature Online a journal?
 * 2. "...the American Civil War, industrialism, racism, women's rights, and the struggles of the laboring class.[13]" - I don't see this information in the reference provided.
 * 1a. Questions on the prose:
 * What is an "entrepreneurial spell"?
 * ...public schools in her hometown were not yet available - this isn't clear - are you purposefully distinguishing between public and private schools? what do you mean by "available"? like there was no teacher to staff the schools? or do you mean there was no school in Wheeling?
 * In 'Personal life and family', "...but it was her last." - her last what?
 * Conclusion
 * 2. "...the American Civil War, industrialism, racism, women's rights, and the struggles of the laboring class.[13]" - I don't see this information in the reference provided.
 * 1a. Questions on the prose:
 * What is an "entrepreneurial spell"?
 * ...public schools in her hometown were not yet available - this isn't clear - are you purposefully distinguishing between public and private schools? what do you mean by "available"? like there was no teacher to staff the schools? or do you mean there was no school in Wheeling?
 * In 'Personal life and family', "...but it was her last." - her last what?
 * Conclusion
 * It has been one week since the article was last edited. Because there has been no progress I am closing the review. Once the above issues are addressed the article may be re-nominated for GA-class. maclean (talk) 04:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)