Talk:William Edward Sanders/GA1

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 10:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Nominator: Zawed (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  10:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written
 * a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

Check for WP:LEAD:


 * 1) Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for Introductory text:  ✅
 * 4) * Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO): ✅
 * 5) ** Major Point 1: Early life "Born in Auckland in 1883, Sanders took up a seafaring career in 1899. He initially worked aboard steamships before transferring to sailing ships working around New Zealand waters to enhance his career prospects." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 6) ** Major Point 2: First World War "After the outbreak of the First World War, he earned a master's certificate in late 1914 and joined the Royal Naval Reserve. He completed military training in the United Kingdom after which he served aboard the Helgoland, a Q-ship which operated against German submarines." (summarised well in the lead)
 * 7) *** Major Point 2.1: HMS Prize "His Victoria Cross was won in April 1917 while commanding the HMS Prize. He was killed in action a few months later when the Prize was sunk by a German U-boat." (summarised well in the lead) ( not a concise summary of the corresponding section in the body, the notability of this article is in this point, hence it should be given due weight. )
 * 8) ** Major Point 3: Memorials "" ( not in the lead, this point is given a Heading 2 in the body, either it should appear in the lead or the Heading 2 should be removed with the relevant content adjusted in the other sections. )
 * 9) * Check for Relative emphasis: ✅
 * 10) ** Major Point 1: Early life "Born in Auckland in 1883, Sanders took up a seafaring career in 1899. He initially worked aboard steamships before transferring to sailing ships working around New Zealand waters to enhance his career prospects." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 11) ** Major Point 2: First World War "After the outbreak of the First World War, he earned a master's certificate in late 1914 and joined the Royal Naval Reserve. He completed military training in the United Kingdom after which he served aboard the Helgoland, a Q-ship which operated against German submarines." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
 * 12) ** Major Point 2.1: HMS Prize "His Victoria Cross was won in April 1917 while commanding the HMS Prize. He was killed in action a few months later when the Prize was sunk by a German U-boat." ( the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body, the notability of this article is in this point, hence it should be given due weight. )
 * 13) ** Major Point 3: Memorials "" ( not in the lead, this point is given a Heading 2, either it should appear in the lead or the Heading 2 should be removed with the relevant content adjusted in the other sections. )
 * 14) * Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN): ✅
 * 15) ** Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE): ✅
 * 16) *** "William Edward Sanders VC, DSO (7 February 1883 – 14 August 1917) was a New Zealander recipient of the Victoria Cross (VC), the highest and most prestigious award for gallantry in the face of the enemy that can be awarded to British and Commonwealth forces."
 * 17) ** Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE): ✅
 * 18) ** Check for Proper names and titles: ✅
 * 19) ** Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
 * 20) ** Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
 * 21) ** Check for Pronunciation: None
 * 22) ** Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK): ✅
 * 23) ** Check for Biographies: NA
 * 24) ** Check for Organisms: NA
 * 25) Check for Biographies of living persons:  NA
 * 26) Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  ✅
 * 27) * Check for Non-English titles:
 * 28) * Check for Usage in first sentence:
 * 29) * Check for Separate section usage:
 * 30) Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  ✅
 * 31) Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER):  None

✅

Check for WP:LAYOUT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Headings and sections: ✅
 * 3) * Check for Section templates and summary style: ✅
 * 4) * Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS): ✅
 * 5) Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  ✅
 * 6) * Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Works or publications: ✅
 * 8) * Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): ✅
 * 9) * Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): ✅
 * 11) * Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): ✅
 * 12) * Check for Links to sister projects: ✅
 * 13) * Check for Navigation templates: ✅
 * 14) Check for Formatting:  ✅
 * 15) * Check for Images (WP:LAYIM): ✅
 * 16) * Check for Links: ✅
 * 17) * Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE): ✅

✅

Check for WP:WTW: ✅


 * 1) Check for Words that may introduce bias:  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Puffery (WP:PEA): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL): ✅
 * 4) * Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL): ✅
 * 5) * Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED): ✅
 * 6) * Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY): ✅
 * 8) Check for Expressions that lack precision:  ✅
 * 9) * Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM): ✅
 * 11) * Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME): ✅
 * 12) * Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
 * 13) Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  ✅

Check for WP:MOSFICT: ✅


 * 1) Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI): ✅
 * 3) * Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT): ✅

✅


 * Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):
 * Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):

2: Verifiable with no original research
 * a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
 * b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with the other A-class articles.)

✅

Check for WP:RS: ✅

Cross-checked with the other A-class articles: Howard Kippenberger, Herbert Ernest Hart, Alexander Godley, William George Malone, Frank Worsley


 * 1) Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING):  (contentious) ✅
 * 2) * Is it contentious?: Yes
 * 3) * Does the ref indeed support the material?:
 * 4) Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 5) * Who is the author?:
 * 6) * Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
 * 7) * What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
 * 8) * What else has the author published?:
 * 9) * Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
 * 10) Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

✅

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: ✅


 * 1) Check for Direct quotations:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Likely to be challenged:  ✅
 * 3) Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):  NA


 * c. No original research: ✅

✅


 * 1) Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  ✅
 * 2) Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  ✅
 * 3) Check for original images (WP:OI):  ✅

3: Broad in its coverage

✅

Cross-checked with the other A-class articles: Howard Kippenberger, Herbert Ernest Hart, Alexander Godley, William George Malone, Frank Worsley


 * 1) Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
 * 2) Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
 * 3) Check for Out of scope:
 * 4) Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
 * 5) Check for All material that is notable is covered:
 * 6) Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
 * 7) Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
 * 8) Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
 * 9) Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

✅


 * 1) Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
 * 2) Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

✅

4. Fair representation without bias: ✅


 * 1) Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 2) Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  ✅
 * 3) Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  ✅
 * 4) Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  ✅
 * 5) Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  ✅
 * 6) Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  ✅
 * 7) Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 8) Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  ✅
 * 9) Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  ✅
 * 10) Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  ✅
 * 12) Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI):  None
 * 13) Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV):  None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images ✅ (PD)

✅

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: ✅


 * 1) Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  ✅
 * 2) Check for copyright status:  ✅
 * 3) Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  ✅
 * 4) Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  ✅

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: ✅


 * 1) Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  ✅
 * 2) Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  ✅
 * 3) Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  ✅

Zawed, I'm very happy and inspired to see your work here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article :
 * I think the lead can be improved in order to provide an accessible overview and to give relative emphasis.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. Please feel free to strike out any recommendation from this review which you think will not help in improving the article which is our main aim here. All the best, --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  06:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Seabuckthorn, many thanks for the review. That is an extensive and no doubt time-consuming checklist you have worked through there. I have revised both the lead and section headings in response to your comments. Let me know if you believe the lead still does not accurately reflect the body of the article or place appropriate weight on the VC. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 08:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The lead looks perfect now! Thanks, Zawed, very much for your diligence, care and precision in writing such great articles. --  Seabuckthorn   ♥  09:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Promoting the article to GA status. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  09:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)