Talk:Lilly Daché/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aussie Article Writer (talk · contribs) 04:01, 10 July 2021 (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.	What does "to blocking a crown for draping a turban" mean? Otherwise, the prose is excellent.  Done Explained and wiki-linked.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Decent lead section, layout is solid. I took the liberty of converting the books to use {{Cite book}}, using {{Google book}}.
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.	Uses {{sfn}} effectively, reflist is good and uses appropriate citation templates.
	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).	Please note: I am assuming good faith for all sources I cannot check (i.e. are not online), but I am noting that I cannot verify the material Early life and immigration: I added the editors of two books (sorry, I originally got confused!), but everything checks out that I can check online Career: unable to check Lambert 1976 or Joselit 2002, as no preview in Google Books unable to review Saturday Review of Literature reference as not online Doug Coldwell can you clarify what page you are referencing in Life for "Daché's yearly production of custom headgear was estimated as high as 10,000 hats a year." - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 05:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Other than above, all references checkout Personal life: they all check out. The imdb reference, I consider to be reliable on this occasion.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No WP:OR.
	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.
	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.	File:Lily Dache checking out her hat design.jpg - tagged correctly, valid fair use rationale File:Lilly Dache on E 56th St.jpg - public domain image
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	File:Lily Dache checking out her hat design.jpg - appropriate, it shows her showing off her hat, historical image, not able to be provided by non-free use image File:Lilly Dache on E 56th St.jpg - very appropriate as it shows Dache at her residence on E 56th St, New York City, with her hats
	7. Overall assessment.	All issues resolved, article has passed GA. Well done, another fine article! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 14:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• Thanks for review. I get started on the issues as soon as possible. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
• Item 2b above ->  Done Adjusted to 9,000 hats per year = with Scribner Encyclopedia reference.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Aussie Article Writer: All items have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)