Talk:Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester/GA1

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

Reviewer: maclean (talk) 04:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see What is a good article?)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 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.
 * 2) It is stable.
 * 3) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Notes
 * In "Education and marriage", "John Dudley was now the most powerful adult in England." - this is quite the statement. I think it should be qualified. For example, 'powerful' in terms of what (politically, socially, economically, etc), and according to whom (did contemporaries think this or is this an assessment of historians?).
 * I've changed the wording. He was a kind of regent, but without the title.
 * Are these images necessary: File:Edward VI swagger.jpg, File:Nicholas Hilliard 005.jpg, File:Sir Francis Walsingham by John De Critz the Elder.jpg - there is a copyright claim against them but given The_position of the WMF I will accept them as correctly tagged.
 * Thanks. These so-tagged National Portrait Gallery images have been allowed in recent GAs; apart from the WMF stance it was argued that the case seemed somehow resolved; if you see a problem perhaps you might ask at User talk:Awadewit for clarity. Buchraeumer (talk) 17:12, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Conclusion
 * The article meets all the GA requirements listed above. It is comprehensive beyond the GA's requirement for being broad. The prose is all correct but the quality varies from excellent to ok: while ok, I don't particularly care for structures like "Henry Dudley was killed in the battle by a cannonball, before Robert's own eyes, as he said." For a more detailed review, try Peer Review or FAC. -maclean (talk) 15:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the pass and for your pains and tips!! I will do something about that sentence. Buchraeumer (talk) 16:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)