Talk:Félix Delahaye

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Félix Delahaye is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Félix Delahaye has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 20, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Félix Delahaye/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AGK [•] 22:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
The prose is poorly written in one key area: the use of commas. For instance:
"With Thouin’s nomination Delahaye joined a team of more than ten scientists, engineers and artists (referred to as “savants”) in the position of gardener" - this should be,
"With Thouin’s nomination, Delahaye joined a team of more than ten scientists, engineers and artists (referred to as “savants”) ~~in the position of~~as a gardener."
(Okay, so the stricken bit is a prose improvement, not a problem with the commas:P.) Failing to use the comma properly means that sentences run on too long, which is so distracting for the reader as to make the article difficult to follow. GAs don't have to be perfect, but this problem would not be acceptable even in a stub.
Additionally, the titles of the section headers seem overly lengthy to me, but this is not so major a problem at GA level.
Prose meets our policies on presentation and style.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
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):
Images selected are engaging and properly licensed; but they're too big! Some of them take up half of the page on my monitor. This crushes the text and makes the article appear ugly.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
The prose is not up to much. This is a French topic so my first guess is that the nominator and/or primary author/s are French and do not have English as their first language. The article is off to a great start and I don't want to kill it at GAN just because the authors are a bit weak on the comma so I'm putting this on hold and inviting the nominator to improve the prose (and preferably put this up for a copyedit).
Much better! Still not quite perfect, but certainly satisfactory relative to what we expect of a good article. I've done some minor copy-edits myself, whilst reviewing the article.

Current status: GA review on hold. AGK [•] 22:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have now done a copyedit of the whole article.Granitethighs 10:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. The article now meets the GA criteria, so I'm happy to pass this nomination. AGK [•] 00:00, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Thanks for taking this on AGK. I shall go through the prose, especially the commas. I know nothing about pictures. I assume they look different according to each person's monitor and the print size they have on their computer - but I have no idea. Please adjust the size to whatever you think is appropriate. Also I am not sure what "put this up for copyedit" means but I am more than happy for someone to go over it for expression etc.Granitethighs 09:29, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]