Talk:William Thompson (Medal of Honor, 1950)/GA1

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 15:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Will review soon. MathewTownsend (talk) 15:02, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * review
 * What about using this source, the Medal of Honor News: Two Black Medal of Honor recipients honored with renovated park in the South Bronx

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
 * Under "Military career" the subject is always referred to as Thompson, never he or with some less repetitive wording. Too much repetition of "Thompson".
 * I've cut down the instances of this. — Ed! (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * Too many "known to have" and "known to be" etc. Passive voice is to be avoided.

Will place on hold while issues are addressed. MathewTownsend (talk) 20:43, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed this. — Ed! (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
 * b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
 * c. no original research:
 * assume good faith as the sources aren't accessible to me
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Also, the citation Appleman 1998, p. 194 is not in the Sources, so it throws a "Harv error: link to #CITEREFAppleman1998" error.
 * (I fixed Appleman; took it off Battle of Sangju (1950). Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC))
 * a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Also, the citation Appleman 1998, p. 194 is not in the Sources, so it throws a "Harv error: link to #CITEREFAppleman1998" error.
 * (I fixed Appleman; took it off Battle of Sangju (1950). Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC))
 * Also, the citation Appleman 1998, p. 194 is not in the Sources, so it throws a "Harv error: link to #CITEREFAppleman1998" error.
 * (I fixed Appleman; took it off Battle of Sangju (1950). Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC))
 * Also, the citation Appleman 1998, p. 194 is not in the Sources, so it throws a "Harv error: link to #CITEREFAppleman1998" error.
 * (I fixed Appleman; took it off Battle of Sangju (1950). Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC))


 * That's everything. Thanks for your review. — Ed! (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I made a few more edits to fix some remaining problems. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Reevaluation after fixes:


 * 1. Well written?:
 * 2. Factually accurate?:
 * 3. Broad in coverage?:
 * 4. Neutral point of view?:
 * 5. Article stability?:
 * 6. Images?:

MathewTownsend (talk) 22:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)