Talk:Ed Jew/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Remember to avoid contractions (such as "didn't").

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.

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

   I am interpreting the criteria as such: For a person it may be difficult to get a photograph, and since fair use cannot be used for living people, only if an image is available on the Commons would an image be required. On the other hand, I am a bit skeptical in including the document as an image. I will not remove it, but I would not have included it myself. Including portions of primary sources is not the job of Wikipedia.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   A clear, good article. It reads well, is interesting, stays to the point and covers all relevant areas. Congratulations on a nice piece of work!