Talk:Frank Dekum/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

This article looks great, and so I am passing it to GA status. I just had a couple of comments, neither of which stands in the way of GA:

George H. Williams redirects to a dab page, but I can't figure out to which person this article is referring.
Family section, "including Thrushes, Starlings, and Nightingales" I'm don't think these need to be capitalized, but I'm not sure on this...

Very nice work, and please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to review this article and for your comments and kind words. I have repaired the dab and the bird names according to your suggestions. Finetooth (talk) 19:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.