Talk:Greens Ledge Light/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MusikAnimal (talk · contribs) 22:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I will be taking on this review. Hopefully I'll have some feedback for you by tonight, if not please bear with me as my content-related editing activity is slower during the weekdays. Best — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Concerns

• First sentence under Design, "In 1889, the lighthouse was first formally proposed to mark the Norwalk Harbor". I could easily be missing something, but I don't see the number 1889 in the linked source.
• Dorothy Templeton, who prepared the NHRP form, is introduced to the reader in the third paragraph under Design, yet we don't really say who she is. Maybe state who she is, in full name, before the quote in the second paragraph ("provid[e] an anchorage for...").
• Under Service, FA-251 is linked. Are we sure this satisfies WP:REDYES?
• Under List of keepers there is a custom table with the column "Service Notes", yet that column contains no content. Should we remove it?

All looks good beyond the above concerns. Look forward to promoting this article. — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:45, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Y It has been over ten days since the review was completed, with no word from nominator. Given these are only minor concerns, I have boldly addressed them myself and will pass the nomination. I hope the nominator will return to improve more articles as they have done here. Congrats to them! — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)