Talk:Civilian Public Service/GA3
GA Review #3
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Please consider addressing the remaining issues and pursuing FAC for this article. It's informative, educational, and well-researched.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- Generally good prose, although certain usages (e.g. "Friends" to refer to members of the Society of Friends) might be a bit obscure for readers not familiar with those usages. Do have a copyeditor unfamiliar with such work through the article before an FAC.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- Almost every paragraph has a citation, and the most contentious assertions are cited well, but it's going to need better citations for FA. I generally use books with {{cite book}} sans page numbers and then use {{rp}} to indicate page numbers, but I don't think the way you've done it violates the MOS--and certainly not the GA MOS standards.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Great work. If there's one thing more that this article COULD cover, it's what happened to the 1 in 8 who eventually transferred from CPS to the military.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- No issues.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- If anything, it's been neglected!
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- File:CPS31snow.jpg is a bit hard to understand at its thumbnail resolution. Consider enlarging it.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- A few minor issues remain, but not sufficient to preclude GA recognition. Congratulations!
- Pass/Fail:
