Talk:Romney Academy/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk · contribs) 21:40, 6 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Will be starting soon.--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 21:40, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

: Comments below,
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Issues

 * There is many "Harv errors" in the references.
 * All of the authors should link up now with their below references in the bibliography. -- West Virginian   (talk)  01:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Standardize hyphens in the isbns.
 * All of the ISBNs should now be standardized with hyphens. Thank you for the suggestion! -- West Virginian   (talk)  01:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * There are a lot of duplicate links
 * All the duplicate links have been de-linked! Thank you for the catch -- West Virginian   (talk)  01:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Four citations for one point seems excessive
 * I've removed instances where more than three inline citations had been used. Thanks for the suggestion! -- West Virginian   (talk)  08:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * It is unecessary to put citations like this: "Blah blah blah.[1] Blat Blat Blat.[1]"
 * I've removed the additional inline citations per your suggestion. -- West Virginian   (talk)  08:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The last sentence of the "Board of trustees" section requires a citation.
 * I've added two inline citations to two references for the last sentence of this section. Let me know if this works! -- West Virginian   (talk)  08:37, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 23:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Tomandjerry211 (alt), thank you again for the thorough review. Please take another look and let me know if you identify any outstanding issues or if you have any questions or comments. -- West Virginian   (talk)  08:37, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Passing, Well done.--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 10:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Tomandjerry211 (alt), thank you for the review! I look forward to working with you again soon! -- West Virginian   (talk)  23:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)