 | Dermide Leclerc has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 29, 2013. (Reviewed version). |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dermide Leclerc article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Dermide Leclerc/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 01:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Alex, I'll be happy to review this one. Comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I've made some minor changes as I went--feel free to revert any with which you disagree--but my initial impression is that this is ripe for promotion. The prose is solid, the work appears well-sourced, and the coverage about as complete as you could expect the coverage of an 18th-century six-year-old to be. The only concern I'd raise is that this article seems pretty marginal for notability--there's nothing of significance here that couldn't be easily folded into Pauline's article--but notability is not an issue for GA. I'll do some source checks and the final checklist now. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:44, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
|
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Spotchecks show no evidence of copyright issues. |
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
| 2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
|
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
|
|
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | |
|
|
2c. it contains no original research. | |
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
|
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | |
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
|
|
7. Overall assessment. | Pass as GA |