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.
|
- As is my usual style, I am going to go through and make any small changes needed myself to save us both time. If you object to any, just let me know here and we can discuss.
- I would suggest moving the 'History' section above 'Design', and merging the 'Gallery' section into 'Design'.
- The reference to slow subscription collection is a little surprising after the previous paragraph - make it clearer that Evans was not asked to fund the entire cost of the church. Roughly what percentage did he pay? Do we know a specific amount?
- Explain what the "Colorado Conference" is on first reference.
- Issues addressed, pass.
|
|
1b. it complies with the
Manual of Style guidelines for
lead sections,
layout,
words to watch,
fiction, and
list incorporation.
|
|
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.
|
- We probably don't need three citations for Evans being the oldest continuously-used religious building in Denver, but in looking at which to keep, it would be good to keep the more contemporary one and not those from the '70s.
- Issue addressed, pass.
|
|
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).
|
- Pass, a number of the sources were not independent, but they were not used to cite anything controversial or disputed, so no issues. Otherwise high-quality and reliable.
|
|
2c. it contains
no original research.
|
|
|
2d. it contains no
copyright violations or
plagiarism.
|
- Nothing found by Earwig or manual spot-check. Pass.
|
3. Broad in its coverage:
|
|
3a. it addresses the
main aspects of the topic.
|
- Not able to find any significant areas not covered here. Pass.
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style).
|
- What relevance does the Iliff marriage have to the chapel? I'm sure many people were married there over the years. Seems overdetailed. Cut to a single sentence, or entirely.
- To my taste I would reduce this further, but it's good enough for GA standard. Pass.
|
|
4.
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
|
- No issues of neutrality found. Pass.
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute.
|
- Some recent tweaks, but nothing major, no unresolved issues on talk/edit warring. Pass.
|
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.
|
- Images all look fine, double-checked the '50s ones by unknown university employees but they don't present an issue, pass.
|
|
6b. media are
relevant to the topic, and have
suitable captions.
|
|
|
7. Overall assessment.
|
|