Talk:Antonio Luna/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: KevinNinja (talk · contribs) 23:15, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Let's start!

Lead

• Lead should be broken up into multiple paragraphs or reformatted to improve readability.
• "He was regarded as the most brilliant of the Filipino military officers during the war" includes a word to watch. I would recommend reformatting or removing this line, or including more sources.

Family background

• I believe that this section could be broken up, if possible, to improve readability.

Sources

• For the magnitude of text in some of the sections, I don't believe four sources is enough to qualify for GA status. More sources should be found from a wider variety of texts.
• There are 4 dead links in your article. Remove or fix these.

Thank you for the input. I shall make the necessary edits soon. I think it has more than four sources, as reflected in the references section. Arius1998 (talk) 08:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Final review checklist

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):

   Well written. Minor grammar fixes could be done, but nothing major. Please continue to maintain this article.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Sourcing is well done. Much improved.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Detailed, but some structural improvements are possible.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   Pictures could go into more detail.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Well done; good article. Small improvements could be made, mostly in format and small detailing.