GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: MaxnaCarta ( talk · contribs) 06:48, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Lead
Supreme Court (1890-1910)
Brewer has often been described as an extremely conservative justice.[18]:45, meaning that the claim is found on page 45 of source number 18. That page says "The Kansan...has been depicted as the embodiment of extreme judicial conservatism...", which I think that supports the "described as an extremely conservative justice" claim. The sentence is also followed by a quote from Paul, which gives the reader an example of someone arguing that he's extremely conservative. Let me know if there's something else I should do here. (PS – if you're curious regarding that "more liberal hand" line, "liberal" here means loose/unrestrained: the sentence is saying that he commented freely on things "that affect the nation at large" (something I mention in the "extrajudicial activities" section), not that he actually adhered to a left-of-center judicial philosophy.)
Source checking
@
Extraordinary Writ please see above. Thanks
MaxnaCarta (
talk) 11:15, 9 September 2022 (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. | Yes. Well written piece of work. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Good compliance with MOS. |
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. | No claims are made without a reference. Anything likely to be challenged has been sourced. |
![]() |
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). | Not only are sources reliable, they are of the upmost quality. Most are peer reviewed, scholarly sources. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | Well referenced. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Clean copyvio report, and images appear to be appropriately licenced. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Indeed, and actually covers the topic so well it is likely headed towards the FA criteria of a comprehensive review of relevant literature too. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Good job in this regard. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | I do think the article is neutral. However in order to improve, this article would do well to take perspective from other more conservative critique also. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No ongoing edit wars. |
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. | As above. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are appropriate. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Congratulations! Another brilliant piece of work by EW. |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: MaxnaCarta ( talk · contribs) 06:48, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Lead
Supreme Court (1890-1910)
Brewer has often been described as an extremely conservative justice.[18]:45, meaning that the claim is found on page 45 of source number 18. That page says "The Kansan...has been depicted as the embodiment of extreme judicial conservatism...", which I think that supports the "described as an extremely conservative justice" claim. The sentence is also followed by a quote from Paul, which gives the reader an example of someone arguing that he's extremely conservative. Let me know if there's something else I should do here. (PS – if you're curious regarding that "more liberal hand" line, "liberal" here means loose/unrestrained: the sentence is saying that he commented freely on things "that affect the nation at large" (something I mention in the "extrajudicial activities" section), not that he actually adhered to a left-of-center judicial philosophy.)
Source checking
@
Extraordinary Writ please see above. Thanks
MaxnaCarta (
talk) 11:15, 9 September 2022 (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. | Yes. Well written piece of work. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Good compliance with MOS. |
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. | No claims are made without a reference. Anything likely to be challenged has been sourced. |
![]() |
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). | Not only are sources reliable, they are of the upmost quality. Most are peer reviewed, scholarly sources. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | Well referenced. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Clean copyvio report, and images appear to be appropriately licenced. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Indeed, and actually covers the topic so well it is likely headed towards the FA criteria of a comprehensive review of relevant literature too. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Good job in this regard. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | I do think the article is neutral. However in order to improve, this article would do well to take perspective from other more conservative critique also. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No ongoing edit wars. |
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. | As above. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are appropriate. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Congratulations! Another brilliant piece of work by EW. |