User:CaroleHenson/Frank Weston Benson good article workpage

This is a workspace for improving the Frank Weston Benson over time...

Checklist of things to do 1.Well-written:
 * edit to ensure clear, concise
 * double-check for repitition
 * Ipigott worked on that earlier--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Completed another sweep after more writing and it doesn't seem to be an issue--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

2.Factually accurate and verifiable: 3.Broad in its coverage: 4.Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. 5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. 6.Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * check grammar and spelling
 * check manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
 * ensure not summarizing so much that it's hard for the reader/reviewer to make the connection back to the sources
 * check references, ensure all links work correctly
 * ensure everything is cited
 * ensure caption information is correct, accurate
 * Fill in some of the weak areas
 * Covers Benson as a leading artist
 * Work on Impressionism, especially his style
 * Identify and write about his illustrations
 * Check out other books written about FWB

A good article is—

1.Well-written: (a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[2] 2.Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout; (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; and (c) it contains no original research. 3.Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). 4.Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. 5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. 6.Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.


 * Talk:Langlois Bridge at Arles (Van Gogh series)