Talk:SS Minnesotan/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Hi! I will be doing the GA review for this article, and should have the full review up within a couple of hours. Dana boomer (talk) 17:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- In the "Interwar years" section, you say "while the load of copper was reportedly the largest water shipment of Arizona copper to that time." Should this be "at that time"?
- That's the same sense, but "at the time" suggests there it was the largest of a concurrent group, but not necessarily the largest ever. The source indicated that it was the largest ever (as of the date of the source), and I think "to that time" conveys that a little better. — Bellhalla (talk) 18:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- In the "World War II" section, you say "Minnesotan had some undisclosed problem". It might be me, but this wording sounds a little odd. Perhaps something along the lines of "Minnesotan developed an undisclosed problem"?
- I like your proposed wording and have implemented it. — Bellhalla (talk) 18:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- In the "Interwar years" section, you say "while the load of copper was reportedly the largest water shipment of Arizona copper to that time." Should this be "at that time"?
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Another very nice article. There are a couple of very minor prose issues, but despite these, I am passing the article to GA status. The two prose items are nitpicky things, which you can fix if you have the wish, time and energy :) Let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)