Talk:Jeni Bojilova-Pateva/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 18:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll try to review this tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)



  • "After graduating with teaching credentials she began her profession, but was barred from teaching when a law was passed limiting married women's rights. She turned to activism and journalism, becoming involved in the international women's movement." - dates?  Done SusunW (talk) 13:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
  • " Her book В помощ на жената (To Help Women) -year?  Done SusunW (talk) 13:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
  • " began giving talks on the" -began as an orator for ?  Done SusunW (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Italicize the names of the newspapers in English. "The situation of woman and child in Bulgaria" -should be capitalized as a title in English too.  Done SusunW (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
  • "In 1909, she published an article in the newspaper Ден (Day) arguing for women's emancipation and in 1910, " -and the following year? -to avoid being repetitive with citing dates.  Done SusunW (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

" She is remembered, along with Anna Karima, as one of the "two most prominent leaders of the women's movement" in their era." -really? If it's a quote state who it's by.  Done SusunW (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@SusunW: Well done, nice to see you expanding existing articles too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:21, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Dr. Blofeld for the review, yes, as long as it isn't someone where drive-by trivial content is repeatedly added, I enjoy cleaning up articles. This one was a joy to do as I learned a lot while writing it. SusunW (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Nice one.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:42, 12 September 2019 (UTC)