Talk:Sara Northrup Hollister/GA1

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

I shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment
 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

Passes when checked against quick fail criteria, on to substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * Lead: ...was the second wife of L. Ron Hubbard, from 1946-1951, and of Miles Hollister from 1951 to her death in 1997. Clarity - was she the second wife of Hollister as well?
 * b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * Adequately referenced. I assume good faith as there no online sources.
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * All sources appear reliable
 * c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * 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:
 * One minor concern with the lead, on hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Only GA Hold concern appears to have been a minor grammar issue. Fixed . Cirt (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That is possibly less precise, though - if she was his 2nd wife as well, then the article may as well say so. --Tango (talk) 23:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * One minor concern with the lead, on hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Only GA Hold concern appears to have been a minor grammar issue. Fixed . Cirt (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That is possibly less precise, though - if she was his 2nd wife as well, then the article may as well say so. --Tango (talk) 23:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * One minor concern with the lead, on hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Only GA Hold concern appears to have been a minor grammar issue. Fixed . Cirt (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That is possibly less precise, though - if she was his 2nd wife as well, then the article may as well say so. --Tango (talk) 23:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Only GA Hold concern appears to have been a minor grammar issue. Fixed . Cirt (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That is possibly less precise, though - if she was his 2nd wife as well, then the article may as well say so. --Tango (talk) 23:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, my concern has been fixed the sentence is clear now. Passing as a Good Article, Congratulations and thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC)