Talk:Zina Young Card/GA1
(Redirected from Talk:Zina P. Young Card/GA1)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Aussie Article Writer in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Aussie Article Writer (talk · contribs) 00:12, 22 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. | Excellent prose, spelling and grammar are correct, no words to watch. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The lead section is excellent, as is the article structure. However, it would be best to incorporate the references in the lead into the body of the article. See WP:CITELEAD.
| |
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. | ||
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 that I assume that sources I can't access are correct, however I feel it only fair that I note that I haven't been able to verify them.
| |
2c. it contains no original research. | I was concerned initially about the sentence "Throughout her life, Card was an academic, political, and spiritual leader", but actually it is then fully supported by the subsequent material in the paragraph. So, I can see no original research. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | I am not a subject matter expert, but it does seem to cover Card's life fairly extensively. However:
| |
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. |
| |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. |
| |
7. Overall assessment. |
Discussion
edit- I’m working from home today (lockdown). This one might take me longer than normal. I’m enjoying reading it though. So far, great job! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 01:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
- And I just noticed SarahSV edited this one. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 01:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
- Progress update: I've gotten through most of the references - some great and detailed research obviously went into this article! I am taking a break and will continue when I'm back from it. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 06:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
- Cstickel(byu) as I've said a few times now, a great article. Could you address the (few) issues I have highlighted? - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 08:00, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Aussie Article Writer: Thank you! I've gone through your review and addressed your concerns:
- 1b.I took the inline citations out of the lead. (All of that information is cited in the article.) But I left in the source for the direct quote, and found the name of the historian who called her "the unquestionable female leader of the Alberta colonies" (and wikilinked to her).
- 2b.I added the references you requested (for "Career and activism," "Personal life," and "Legacy") and corrected the prose in some areas.
- 3a.I think my sentence about her being dean of two colleges was referring to her being dean of two schools within Brigham Young Academy, but I couldn't find a source about that, so I changed that prose.
- Let me know what else needs to be done, and thank you so much for your review and work on the article! Cstickel(byu) (talk) 14:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
- I moved one sentence from the lead to the legacy section, otherwise well done on a fine article. All issues have been corrected, this passes GA! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)