Jump to content

Talk:David B. Bleak/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 13:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC) I don't think I've had the pleasure of reviewing one of your GA noms yet, so here it goes. This particular article caught my fancy at DYK, and if I remember correctly shouldn't need much work. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist[edit]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. See below
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Good
2c. it contains no original research. See below
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Accepting that after the war he settled into a citizen's lifestyle, so no problems with the lack of information before his death
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Good
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Good
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Per definition
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. One image excluding medals and ribbons, of the subject so clearly relevant
7. Overall assessment. Pending

Comments[edit]

1a[edit]

General
Lede
Biography
Military career
Medal of Honor action
Subsequent life
Citation

1b[edit]

  • Are #Military career and #Medal of Honor action worth merging?
    • The action section covered the event in-depth, in this case if they were merged, people would ask why the level of detail suddenly increases drastically. —Ed!(talk) 18:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2a[edit]

  • Why is the title of the Greenwood source in lowercase?
  • Just a suggestion for any future FA nom: backing up the WP and history museum sources would be nice, especially since the WP seems to redo their website every few years.

6a[edit]

a. Fails verification - Doesn't explicitly say that he worked on the railroads after ranching; no close paraphrasing
Fixed. —Ed!(talk) 18:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
b. Simple synth, acceptable; no close paraphrasing
c. Passes verification and paraphrasing check
d. Passes verification and paraphrasing check
e. Passes verification, acceptable paraphrasing
f. Passes verification, acceptable paraphrasing
g. Passes verification and paraphrasing check
  • FN 9
a. Passes verification and paraphrasing check
b. Passes verification and paraphrasing check
AGF on offline sources