Talk:D. C. Fontana/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Nazcheema (talk · contribs) 21:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Review
[edit]I have nominated one and the rule is to review two. As a fan of Star trek I will be happy to review this as one of my two. Please to bear with me while I understand process and criteria. Thank you. Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 21:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
- I am sorry but I am thinking of failing nomination. I have a concern that there is nothing about her personal life, the article reading like a list of works in narrative form. There is a key criterion, broad in coverage, that it is not meeting. I need to think more about criteria and how to interpret. Not only this, I am finding too many instances of English that is unsatisfactory and a lack of dates that makes for an uncertain chronology. For example, which years are covered by her "later work" and is she still working?
- Please to leave this with me for now. Thank you. Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 09:48, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Result
[edit]Having read the criteria. I believe this article fails "broad in its coverage" and "well written". That is two of the six good article criteria. I am therefore sorry, I must fail the nomination. It has been nominated too soon when much more work is required still. Among many observations I have of poor English are
- "She became the secretary for Samuel A. Peeples, who she sold her first story to; "A Bounty for Bill", for the series The Tall Man". This is not good English grammar. "who ... to" should be "to whom" and the semi-colon should be a colon.
- "novel writer" should be "novelist".
- "graduated with a Associate degree": "a" is "an" before a vowel.
- "After she graduated college" should be "After she graduated from college".
Noticing that the assessment was moved to B-class when GAN submitted, I contest this. Using criteria for B-class:
- b1 Coverage and accuracy = no (much more work needed as explained)
- b2 Use of English = no (issues with grammar and wording, reads like a narrative form list of works, spelling is satisfactory)
- b3 Structure = yes (this is satisfactory)
- b4 Navigation = yes (also satisfactory)
- b5 Referencing & citations = yes (but to be verified if a new GAN raised)
- b6 Supporting materials = no (there are none, a few photos would help)
I believe the article is borderline start-class → C-class and will re-assess start-class. I will complete the GAN with a fail. Thank you. Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:13, 15 June 2016 (UTC)