Talk:Jean Bartik/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wugapodes (talk · contribs) 15:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Will review. Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 15:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Checklist

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. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused (see summary style):

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:

Comments

If the comment is numbered, it must be addressed for the article to pass, if it is bulleted, it's an optional suggestion or comment that you don't need to act on right now.
When I quote things, you can use ctrl+f to search the page for the specific line I quoted.

1. The infobox said she got her GED from the UPenn in 1967, but that is not mentioned in the body of the article. It should be, especially since it seems rather counter intuitive that she received her GED after a BS.

2. "Bartik described the first public demonstration of the ENIAC in 1946:" is this supposed to be part of the block quote?

3. "celebrating Bartik's career and the university's contributions to technology, boasts rare one-of-a-kind ENIAC, BINAC and UNIVAC exhibits" This seems a little peacock-y and promotional

Results

On Hold for 7 days pending revisions. Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 19:17, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

@Wugapodes: Hi, thank you so much for the review! I think I've taken care of everything now. best, Keilana (talk) 21:47, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Promoted Honestly, I thought I had already done this; sorry it slipped my mind! Anyway, a quality article on a topic (women in STEM, for one) that is unfortunately not covered well on Wikipedia. Truly a needed addition, and proudly a quality one. Thank you for the work, and I hope to see you and your content again soon! Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 00:20, 4 July 2016 (UTC)