Talk:William Henry Barlow/GA1

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

Reviewer: Designate (talk) 10:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. This article is a pretty good summary of the sources and well written per the GA criteria. I just have some minor concerns:
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The lead should be a more substantive summary of the article (see WP:MOSINTRO and other GAs). It doesn't have to be very long, considering the size of the article, but at least a paragraph should be included touching on the most important points. My other concern is the heading structure—is it possible to divide the "Career" section a little bit more?
 * I have expanded the lead.
 * I did play around with dividing the career thematically as I did with Sir John Fowler, 1st Baronet, but this produced a series of quite short sections and I felt chronological ordering was less disjointed.--DavidCane (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The ODNB says he died "of exhaustion"—this is vague but maybe you should mention it in conjunction with the broken leg.
 * Added.--DavidCane (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 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):
 * All of the images are public domain, so there are no issues. Mind you, there is some administrative garbage on File:John Collier - William Henry Barlow.jpg that ought to be checked out.
 * I have tidied-up the description.--DavidCane (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I have tidied-up the description.--DavidCane (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Good work on the article. I've put the nomination on hold. —Designate (talk) 10:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review.--DavidCane (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Great work. —Designate (talk) 15:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)