Talk:Romney Classical Institute/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk · contribs) 23:42, 11 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

 * It is unecessary to put citations like this: "Polonium is radioactive.[1] Polonium was found in the 1940s.[1]"
 * Four citations for one point seems excessive
 * Standardize hyphens in the isbns
 * Add identifiers for some of the refs.
 * In the images replaced the U.S. PD-1923 tag with a PD-100 yer tag, since all images are from before 1915.
 * Tomandjerry211 (alt), thank you for engaging in this review. I've consolidated inline citations so that the same citation is not placed at the end of multiple sequential sentences. I've also removed the fourth citation so that there are no more than three citations at any given place. I've also hyphenated the ISBN and ensured that all sources have OCLC reference information. The older images, all produced before 1915, have been given the PD-100 template in Wikimedia Commons. Please let me know if you identify any further issues with this article. Thanks! -- West Virginian   (talk)  15:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Passing, Well done.--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 16:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Tomandjerry211 (alt), thank you again for the review! -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)