Talk:Marie-Jeanne Lamartinière

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Marie-Jeanne Lamartinière/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Averageuntitleduser (talk · contribs) 15:56, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 12:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article as part of the ongoing GAN backlog drive. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Initial comments

• There is unlikely any copyright violation in the article. Earwig's Copyvio Detector has reported only 9.1% in similarity.
• There are no cleanup banners, such as those listed at WP:QF, in the article.
• The article is stable.
• No previous GA reviews.

General comments

• Prose, spelling, and grammar checking.
  • No issues were found in the lede.
  • The rest of the article looks good. There aren't any grammatical errors, though I did notice that "travelling" is used (traveling is preferred more in American English, so it's up to you whether you want to change it).
• Checking whether the article complies with MOS.
  • Good job on that alt text!
  • The article complies with the MOS:LEDE, MOS:LAYOUT, and MOS:WTW guidelines. There is no fiction and embedded lists within the article, so I am skipping MOS:WAF and MOS:EMBED.
• Checking refs, verifiability, and whether there is original research.
  • References section with a {{reflist}} template is present in the article.
  • No referencing issues.
  • Listed references are reliable.
  • Spotchecked Ref 1, 2, 4, 6–all verify the cited content. AGF on other citations.
  • Copyvio already checked.
• Checking whether the article is broad in its coverage.
  • Optional in lede: "she had relationships with two other army officers." → she had relationships with two other army officers, including the Haitian Revolution leader Jean-Jacques Dessalines. Or something like that.
  • The article addresses the main aspects, and it stays focused on the topic.
• Checking whether the article is presented from an NPOV standpoint.
  • The article meets the criteria and is written in encyclopedic language.
• Checking whether the article is stable.
  • As noted in the initial comments, the article has been stable.
• Checking images.
  • Looks good. Postage stamp has been uploaded under a valid license.

Final comments

@Averageuntitleduser: I have to congratulate you on this GAN, because I have not reviewed a GAN with no errors in a very long time! I've added two optional comments that you could change in the article, but other than that, there are no issues with this article. I'm promoting it to GA. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.