Talk:Richard Neal/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: No dabs.

Linkrot: No dead links. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Neal has long been speculated as an eventual frontrunner...' is not good prose.

   One of Neal's longstanding legislative priorities is to simplify the tax code. Who says - attribution in the text required.

   He successfully pushed in 1998 to exempt a child tax credit from being affected by the AMT, and in 2001 Congress made it permanent at his urging. Clarify what the it is.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The PDFs referenced in 1-15 and 38 are large documents so need page numbers.

   The books when referenced in footnotes need page numbers for the particular cites.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Broad and focussed.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Does everyone love him - are there no critics?

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   File:Ma02 109.gif should have a caption such as "Second U.S. Congressional district of Massachusetts in the 109th Congress"

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, on hold for seven days for the above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

   OK, thanks for fixing those issues. If you want to take this to WP:FAC, page numbers are essential as they allow the cites to be quickly found. I am happy to list this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

   Thanks. There's not much in the way of published praise or criticism, so I tried to follow the lead of FAs like John McCain and Barack Obama and focus on events rather than opinions. But I made a few changes. The book references are only two pages long so I don't think individual page numbers are necessary. —Designate (talk) 15:52, 4 September 2010 (UTC)