Talk:Occult America/GA1

GA Review

Passed. — Golden ^talk 15:21, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

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

Reviewer: Golden (talk · contribs) 14:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vaticidalprophet, I'm happy to review this article. — Golden ^talk 14:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Synopsis

Wallace, a high-ranking Freemason and self-described "practical mystic", took credit for the inclusion of the Eye of Providence on the dollar bill. - The trivia about him taking credit for the inclusion of the Eye of Providence on the dollar bill seems a bit out of place, as it doesn't provide any information about the book or its content.
by spreading a message of "hope and dignity" to people who felt disaffected or abandoned by mainstream society, Cayce encapsulated the practices that, Horowitz argues, made large sectors of the population open to such concepts. - This was difficult for me to understand. I suggest splitting it up to make it easier to comprehend.

References

Spot-checked references #5, #7, #12, #13, #15.
All spot-checked references confirm the material for which they are cited.

General comments

Earwig's detector does not show any copyright violations.
Images are relevant and appropriately tagged.
This is an interesting article about a fascinating book. The article is broad, focused, neutral, and cites reliable sources while conforming to the MOS. I had two minor concerns, which I noted above, but they are not significant enough for me to hold this review. Therefore, I will be passing the article. Congratulations! — Golden ^talk 15:20, 14 August 2023 (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.