Talk:History of Briarcliff Manor/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: 3family6 (talk · contribs) 17:14, 4 December 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:

   In "Early history", rewrite "area of Westchester which included Briarcliff Manor" to "area of modern day Westchester, which includes Briarcliff Manor." If Westchester was around in 1693, then "area of Westchester, including what is now Briarcliff Manor."--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Created in 1683, and done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 23:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

"A sufficient number of firefighters were serving that the village requested volunteers ages 16–18 to join the Briarcliff Manor Fire Department;" - Should be "number of firefighters who."--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe the sentence makes sense even though it's easier to understand when spoken out. It's saying that such a number served that the village had to request volunteers. I rephrased it.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 23:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

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

   No problems found here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   Reference section; follows consistent format.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

   B. Citations to reliable sources:

   Accepting offline sources AGF, spot-checked online sources.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

   C. No original research:

   All content attributable to sources.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   All major aspects covered.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

   B. Focused:

   Focused on the subject, not too lengthy.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutral, no bias.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Stable, almost entirely a single-author article.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

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:

   All images licensed for the US.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

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

   Relevant and captioned.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

7. Overall: Almost.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Y All issues resolved.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

1. Pass or Fail:

   Just a couple prose issues.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Passed.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

@3family6: Thanks for offering to review and setting this up, but are you planning on getting to this?--ɱ (talk · vbm) 22:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Tomorrow. I wanted to get to it yesterday, but jury duty wiped me out.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

@3family6: Ok, wow that was fast. I addressed your comments.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 23:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)