Talk:Smyth Report/GA1

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

Reviewer: Diannaa (talk · contribs) 13:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye. I have completed the GA review of this article, and just need you to clear up a couple of muddy areas in the prose:


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
 * I'm not understanding the connection between Dodds' commmitment to teaching military personnel and Smyth's decision to commute between Chicago and Princeton. Or is it Smyth who has the commitment to teach? Can you re-word this please, or explain it here and I will have a go?
 * Re-worded to: Harold W. Dodds, began insisting that Smyth work part-time at Princeton, where there was a shortage of physicists because so many of them were engaged in war work. Dodds had commitments to teach Army and Navy personnel, and he needed physicists like Smyth to meet them.
 * Serial commas: yes or no? I went with yes.
 * The hallway door was locked and blocked by a large safe. The windows of Smyth's office and the one adjacent to it were barred, so that the only access was through that office, where there was an armed guard: through which office did people enter? It's not clear.
 * Changed to: The windows of Smyth's office and the one adjacent to it were barred. The hallway door to his office was locked and blocked by a large safe so that the only access was through the adjacent office, where there was an armed guard.
 * Smyth then turned back to Princeton University Press, with one condition: that he receive no royalties. It's not clear who is laying down the condition, Princeton Press or Smyth.
 * Re-worded to: Smyth then turned back to Princeton University Press. He had but one condition: that he receive no royalties. Princeton University Press agreed, but added a stipulation of its own: that Groves's approval be secured.
 * B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * A. Provides references to all sources:
 * All material has citations nicely formatted using sfn templates
 * B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
 * All material is sourced to reliable sources; spot checks reveal no copyright violations or too-close paraphrasing
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Main aspects are addressed:
 * The article covers all the points required for books: Background, summary, style, analysis, publication history, and reception.
 * B. Remains focused:
 * 1) Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * * Ample correctly licensed images.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * * Ample correctly licensed images.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

The article will be placed on hold for one week for editing. Thanks for the fab improvements to this interesting article. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * -- All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:02, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Good amendments, passing to GA class. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations on having this article highlighted as a featured article on the main page. A lot of hard work goes into this process and you deserve appreciation and applause for this achievement. Best Regards,
 *  Bfpage &#124;leave a message 14:12, 12 August 2015 (UTC)