Talk:Oliver Evans/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Philg88 (talk · contribs) 09:33, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Prose

The prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct.

~~:There are a number of commas required with linking clauses. For example:~~

However Evans' invention greatly increased the speed of ...

Similarly he drew up designs for a ...

In addition some stages, particularly cooling, ...

However in January 1808 ...

Per the Wikipedia link policy, common words such as "wire", "leather", " manufacturing", "county" and "brewing" should not be linked. This also applies to links to unrelated topics (e.g. "pyrrhic victory" and "intellectual property").

Alrightly, removed the offending links and many others in the same vein, and cleaned up some of the prose relating to the earlier comments, including some rewording to remove excess general use of 'however'. Unus Multorum (talk) 18:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass The prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:55, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MOS

It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, links, fiction, and list incorporation.

✓ Pass The article is compliant with the Manual of Style. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:55, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reflayout

It provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout.

~~Overall layout is compliant with MOS:LAYOUT, however the following specific issues require attention:~~

References #40, #48 and #50 cite "Dickinson" but there is no accompanying work listed in the bibliography.

There are four citations with missing link/anchor pairs as shown by this tool

~~Thanks, fixed. Unus Multorum (talk) 00:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]

✓ Pass The overall layout is compliant with MOS:LAYOUT and the references are correctly cross-referenced. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged.

~~The article requires the following:~~

~~Early life, 1755–1783~~
~~Please add a citation for the marriage in the last paragraph.~~
~~Writer and Merchant, 1790–1801~~
Please add a citation for the sale of Red Clay Creek and the move to Philadelphia in the first paragraph.
Please add a citation for the claim "Evans over his career would frequently dismiss the interest of his work to scientists, as in his work he saw theory only as a means by which to explain and improve upon practical applications" in the second paragraph.
~~The Oruktor Amphibolos~~
~~Please add a citation for the assertion at the end of the first paragraph: "Unsure of the reliability ..."~~
~~Legacy~~

Please add a citation for the last line of the third paragraph: "And unlike his earlier contributions, Evans was just one of many brilliant minds in steam technology - indeed it would be another inventor, Richard Trevithick, working totally independently of Evans who would develop the high-pressure engine that would make that dream possible." In addition, I would suggest inserting "with" after "unlike" and delete the word "indeed", it is superfluous. Use {{snd}} for the spaced en dash here and elsewhere per WP:MOS-DASH. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:54, 15 August 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Great, think that's all been resolved by adjusting the referencing (or removing one statement which was overreach on my part) and the markup for en dashes. Unus Multorum (talk) 17:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass The article has the requisite in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged.

Original research

It contains no original research.

✓ Pass The article contains no original research. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Broadness

It addresses the main aspects of the topic.

✓ Pass The article provides a full biography and the necessary adjunct information. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Focus

It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.

✓ Pass The article remains focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:58, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

✓ Pass The article is neutral. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stable

It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

✓ Pass The article is stable.

Free or tagged pics

Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content.

✓ Pass All images are tagged and no non-free content is used.

Pics relevant

Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

✓ Pass All images are relevant and have suitable captions.