Talk:Alfred D. Robinson and Marion James Robinson

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AmaryllisGardener (talk · contribs) 15:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Notes

I don't know about having the article be about the couple, but the article title only having the man's name, could we move it to something like "Alfred D. Robinson and Marion James Robinson"? Otherwise it's good, but I'd like to have this resolved before I pass it. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 15:24, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I realize this is kind of a strange approach to the article - neither fish nor fowl, as it were. It was the product of a discussion here, Talk:Rosecroft (San Diego)#Separate article?, about how to create the article. Basically our conclusion was that they should not have separate articles, because their stories overlap so much, and also because there is less documentation about Marion's notability than there is about Alfred's. She was a woman of her time, and in husband-wife partnerships like this, the husband tended to get all the credit and publicity. I think your "Alfred and Marion" suggestion is be a good one. And of course, both Alfred and Marion will redirect to it. Shall I go ahead and move it? --MelanieN (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I think that would be good. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 20:40, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done I think I might also do the same with the other article I set up this way, Fred Urquhart. --MelanieN (talk) 05:00, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@MelanieN: You caught me seconds before turning my laptop off! Passed! :) --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 05:01, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, and sorry for the delay! I was surprised to see a "failed" notice on my talk page! --MelanieN (talk) 05:03, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome! I don't know what happened with Legobot, earlier with Jim Carter's GA it notified Example instead of him, bots do crazy things. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 05:05, 12 January 2015 (UTC)