User:Whiteguru/Snow Booth

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 06:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

'''Starts GA Review Page. The review will follow the same sections of the Article. ''' --Whiteguru (talk) 06:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC) Talk:Newell Snow Booth/GA1 

Observations
HTML document size: 54 kB   Prose size (including all HTML code): 10188 B    References (including all HTML code): 11 kB    Wiki text: 9143 B    Prose size (text only): 5047 B (857 words) "readable prose size" References (text only): 2804 B


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Page layout is fine.


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 9 citations from Shavit do not give page numbers.
 * 11 citations from General Commission on Archives and History: Archives Center Catalog do not give page numbers.  (Some pages extremely difficult to read)
 * The United Methodist Handbook is not a relevant reference.
 * Prominent Personalities in American Methodism gives a snippet view which cannot be reasonably read. It is a mention, only, at best.


 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):


 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * It is difficult to ascertain. Only one reference is accessible, and that is difficult to read in places.


 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Page created 1 July 2020
 * Page has 36 edits by 10 editors
 * 90 day page views = 89, average of 1 view daily.
 * DYK on 30 July 2020 brought 2,733 page views
 * Page history shows steady development, no edit warring observed.


 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * No images on this page.


 * 1) Overall: ❌
 * The references do not conform to WP:VERIFY. In the English Wikipedia, verifiability means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Can't check the major references here. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)