Talk:Karl Allmenröder/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: KommanderC (talk · contribs) 16:47, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I will review this page. KommanderC (talk) 16:47, 18 February 2021 (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. 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:
· · ·

KommanderC (talk) 16:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Check the edit source to see the review it is not showing on the template for some reason.KommanderC (talk) 16:54, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

• Added a missing cite. Article now has a cite closing every paragraph, per WP requirements. Request for repetitious duplicate cites is of dubious validity. I cannot decipher any other deficiencies from the garble above.Georgejdorner (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
  • That includes using edit view in an attempt to decipher your meaning. This is rather a peculiar glitch.Georgejdorner (talk) 02:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

• Just a drive-by comment, VanWyngarden & Dempsey is listed as a source but not actually cited. FWIW, even without VanWyngarden & Dempsey, the sourcing here seems adequate for GA, I don't see the need for more sources so long as everything in the article is cited. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 00:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

• In response to Zawaed's note, VanWyngarden and Dempsey are now listed under Further reading. I also found a cite was missing from Awards and decorations, and supplied it.Georgejdorner (talk) 23:45, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

• KommanderC please advise on the status of this review, it should be wrapped up by now. Zawed (talk) 11:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

• Zawed I would say pass. It has been a while, and I honestly forgot about why I gave it a wait. I think it was lack of sources, but that issue seems fixed. The article looks pretty good to me. KommanderChicken (talk) 18:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

• KommanderC, you were the reviewer, the onus is on you to take the appropriate action to pass as per the GA instructions here. Zawed (talk) 20:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)