Jump to content

Talk:McDonald Ranch House/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: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 01:17, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

[edit]

Interesting choice for an article! It looks generally very good, and I have the following comments:

  • The lead should be expanded to note the pre and post-nuclear test histories of the house
    • Increased the size of the lead. When I put together a major article, I normally create a spin-off article or two. Originally this one was just a copy of the WSMR brochure. It has been expanded somewhat, and now has a spin-off article of its own. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:12, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can more be said about the history of the occupation/purpose of the house before it was taken over by the army? (eg, was it the only house on the ranch)
  • "There is a display on the Schmidt family in the house during each open house" - I'd suggest moving this to the end of the article and add a bit of material explaining that it's generally not open to the public
  • Do we know why the house was selected to be used to assemble the atomic bomb? It seems a surprising choice for such a critical (and expensive) test - I would have expected a purpose-built facility of some kind.
  • I'd suggest adding some material noting the house's historic place listing at the end of the article (when did this occur, and what does it involve?)

Assessment

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citations to reliable sources:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: