Talk:The Plays of William Shakespeare/GA1

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

Initial review
Seems to meet all the criteria, more to follow ... FeydHuxtable (talk) 17:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Full review
Im passing this article. Just made two changes and have three minor suggestions.

I changed the caption from "Johnson reading" to "Samuel Johnson, one of the editors." - if we want to keep close to the original  caption it would be good to say what hes actually reading. Possibly we could use the caption to say Johnson was the principle editor if its agreed that is correct (as I understand the restriction on OR is not so strongly enforced for images?).

"Although Steevens provided most of the textual work, Johnson contributed an additional eighty notes" I removed the word although from the above sentence as its generally used to indicate a surprising relationship between two facts, when from reading the rest of the section it doesnt seem unexpected that in a partnership Johnson would contribute notes while the other editor would focus on corrections.

If theres an intention to progress the article to FA status it would be nice is the below extract could be re-written,  not having ready access to the sources I didnt want to change it, but it doesnt seem in the best encyclopedic style.

Johnson's fascination with Shakespeare continued throughout his life, and Johnson focused his time while preparing A Dictionary of the English Language on Shakespeare's plays.It is no wonder that Shakespeare is the most quoted author in his Dictionary.

Throughout the article, it might look better to use cquote  as I have above  instead of regular block quotes for the quotations.

If its possible some additional web links would be good. Otherwise, a most excellent article!