This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Jack Critchley article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Jack Critchley 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: June 15, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Jack Critchley appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 10 July 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jack Critchley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:45, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: The Drover's Wife ( talk · contribs) 22:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I'll take this on. It's fantastic, as always, but a few comments nonetheless:
1. The article should be clearly written, in good prose, with correct spelling and grammar. Check for coherent formatting, good organization of the article into sections, appropriate use of wikilinks, and other aspects of the Manual of Style referred to in the Good article criteria. After you have read the article, check that the lead section is a good summary and introduction to the topic.
2. The article should be factually accurate according to reliable sources, with inline citations (typically using footnotes) for the six types of material named in the GA criteria.[5] The article should not copy text from sources without quotation or in text attribution, and it should not contain any original synthesis of source material, or other forms of original research. Perfectly formatted citations are not required. Read the detailed guidance at WP:DEADREF before addressing any non-functional URLs.
3. The article should broadly cover the topic without unnecessary digressions. The article may, and sometimes should, go into detail, but it is not required to be comprehensive.
4. The article should be written from the neutral point of view: this viewpoint strives to represent all other views fairly, proportionately, and without bias. Ensure that the article describes disputes without engaging in them.
No concerns here.
5. The article should be stable, with no ongoing edit wars: constructive article improvement and routine editing does not apply here.
No concerns here.
6. The article should comply with image use policy. Images are encouraged but not required. Any images used should be appropriate to the article, have captions and free licenses or valid fair use rationales.
7. The article is free of obvious copyright violations. Reviewers can use several tools, as well as Google searches, to help establish whether material has been plagiarised or cut-and-paste from some of the electronic sources used; but this is not a trivial undertaking.
The Drover's Wife has not edited on Wikipedia for nearly three months. I am requesting a second opinion in the hopes that a new reviewer will be attracted to this nomination and complete the current review. BlueMoonset ( talk) 00:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
hospital ship Port Lyttleton on 19 October 1917.as the new year is not mention up to that point.
All done I reckon, thanks Steelkamp. Really appreciate you taking this on. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 07:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
That's it. Putting review on hold. Steelkamp ( talk) 05:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
97198 (
talk)
11:24, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Peacemaker67 ( talk). Self-nominated at 08:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jack Critchley; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Jack Critchley article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Jack Critchley 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: June 15, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Jack Critchley appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 10 July 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jack Critchley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:45, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: The Drover's Wife ( talk · contribs) 22:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
I'll take this on. It's fantastic, as always, but a few comments nonetheless:
1. The article should be clearly written, in good prose, with correct spelling and grammar. Check for coherent formatting, good organization of the article into sections, appropriate use of wikilinks, and other aspects of the Manual of Style referred to in the Good article criteria. After you have read the article, check that the lead section is a good summary and introduction to the topic.
2. The article should be factually accurate according to reliable sources, with inline citations (typically using footnotes) for the six types of material named in the GA criteria.[5] The article should not copy text from sources without quotation or in text attribution, and it should not contain any original synthesis of source material, or other forms of original research. Perfectly formatted citations are not required. Read the detailed guidance at WP:DEADREF before addressing any non-functional URLs.
3. The article should broadly cover the topic without unnecessary digressions. The article may, and sometimes should, go into detail, but it is not required to be comprehensive.
4. The article should be written from the neutral point of view: this viewpoint strives to represent all other views fairly, proportionately, and without bias. Ensure that the article describes disputes without engaging in them.
No concerns here.
5. The article should be stable, with no ongoing edit wars: constructive article improvement and routine editing does not apply here.
No concerns here.
6. The article should comply with image use policy. Images are encouraged but not required. Any images used should be appropriate to the article, have captions and free licenses or valid fair use rationales.
7. The article is free of obvious copyright violations. Reviewers can use several tools, as well as Google searches, to help establish whether material has been plagiarised or cut-and-paste from some of the electronic sources used; but this is not a trivial undertaking.
The Drover's Wife has not edited on Wikipedia for nearly three months. I am requesting a second opinion in the hopes that a new reviewer will be attracted to this nomination and complete the current review. BlueMoonset ( talk) 00:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
hospital ship Port Lyttleton on 19 October 1917.as the new year is not mention up to that point.
All done I reckon, thanks Steelkamp. Really appreciate you taking this on. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 07:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
That's it. Putting review on hold. Steelkamp ( talk) 05:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
97198 (
talk)
11:24, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Peacemaker67 ( talk). Self-nominated at 08:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jack Critchley; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |