![]() | Ann Rivers has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: November 5, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | Ann Rivers received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: North8000 ( talk · contribs) 18:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I am starting a GA review of this article
Great! I'm looking forward to working with you. Cheers. PrairieKid ( talk) 18:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
A couple of thoughts / questions regarding the Benton incident material. Two revolve around current reference #27. First, while this is a problem with the source is that #25 & #27 are the same article from the same source, but two different web pages where they give two different dates. (April 20th & 21st) #27 is just the first few paragraphs from it and then links to the other page (#25). Second is that #27 is given to support the "hypocrite" statement but there is nothing about that in there. That leaves only #26, an op ed piece which actually makes the accusation to support the statement that "Some have labeled Benton a hypocrite" which is pretty weak, particularly for a BLP situation, and also a primary source for the statement in the article. (all of the references numbers are the numbers as of this writing) Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 20:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The statement "Many have come out in support of Rivers, who claims that Benton was harassing her and calling her a "weird, weird lady" prior to the altercation." looks unsourced. Particularly important as the statement is that there was much support for a strong accusation against Benton. Particularly important in a wp:blp situation. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 20:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The lead should be a summary of what is in the body of the article. There was some info or more detailed info in the lead that was not in the body. I added that material to the body. North8000 ( talk) 01:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Well-written
Factually accurate and verifiable
Broad in its coverage
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
Illustrated, if possible, by images
This has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. Congratulations! Nice article! Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:45, 5 November 2013 (UTC) GA Reviewer
(I have "duplicated" this here for when the review is no longer transcluded)
Congratulations, this has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article! Nice work! Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC) GA Reviewer
![]() | Ann Rivers has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: November 5, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | Ann Rivers received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: North8000 ( talk · contribs) 18:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I am starting a GA review of this article
Great! I'm looking forward to working with you. Cheers. PrairieKid ( talk) 18:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
A couple of thoughts / questions regarding the Benton incident material. Two revolve around current reference #27. First, while this is a problem with the source is that #25 & #27 are the same article from the same source, but two different web pages where they give two different dates. (April 20th & 21st) #27 is just the first few paragraphs from it and then links to the other page (#25). Second is that #27 is given to support the "hypocrite" statement but there is nothing about that in there. That leaves only #26, an op ed piece which actually makes the accusation to support the statement that "Some have labeled Benton a hypocrite" which is pretty weak, particularly for a BLP situation, and also a primary source for the statement in the article. (all of the references numbers are the numbers as of this writing) Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 20:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The statement "Many have come out in support of Rivers, who claims that Benton was harassing her and calling her a "weird, weird lady" prior to the altercation." looks unsourced. Particularly important as the statement is that there was much support for a strong accusation against Benton. Particularly important in a wp:blp situation. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 20:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The lead should be a summary of what is in the body of the article. There was some info or more detailed info in the lead that was not in the body. I added that material to the body. North8000 ( talk) 01:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Well-written
Factually accurate and verifiable
Broad in its coverage
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
Illustrated, if possible, by images
This has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. Congratulations! Nice article! Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:45, 5 November 2013 (UTC) GA Reviewer
(I have "duplicated" this here for when the review is no longer transcluded)
Congratulations, this has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article! Nice work! Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC) GA Reviewer