Talk:Ghazanchetsots Cathedral/GA1
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk · contribs) 19:53, 13 December 2017 (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. |
| |
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. | The citation style is a mix of Shortened Footnote and Template citation styles. I'm okay with that... although I kind of wish that the Black Garden citations were all to the same edition of the work (the 2013 edition is cited; the same quote is on pg. 189 of the 2003 version). However I'm kind of torn because the Google Book citation for the 2013 version is definitely more convenient. Up to you if you want to change it. | |
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. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
| |
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. |
Most of the sources are Armenian, but that's expected because the article is about an Armenian Cathedral. | |
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. | Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 21:44, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Commentsedit
|