This user page was nominated for deletion on 24 May 2024. The result of the discussion was userfy.
Please don't template me! Everybody makes mistakes, and this user finds user warning templates impersonal and disrespectful. If there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.
This user page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This page is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
Hi 48JCL, I noticed the note you left at WP:GAMENTOR, and I'm willing to mentor you. We can do this in a couple of ways: I can pick out a couple of articles you might want to review, or you can choose one yourself; we'll then go through the review process together. What sounds best to you? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! When starting a review, most people use a reviewing template: I personally like {{GAList2}}, but all the others are perfectly fine. What's important is that they are only a guide—you should aim to go beyond just ticking them off. Personally, I nearly always find that I can comment on GA criteria 1, 2, and 3. Here's what I look for in relation to each criterion:
Well-written: I read the article top-to-bottom. If there is anything that doesn't look right (grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation) I either comment at the review or am bold and fix it myself. Then, I look at the Manual of Style (MOS) pages the article needs to comply with. This one isn't a work of fiction and it doesn't have lists, so it just needs to comply with MOS:LEAD, MOS:LAYOUT, and MOS:WTW. You should actively try to find places where the article doesn't match the MOS.
Verifiable:
First, you need to check whether the sources used are all reliable (helpful links for this are WP:RSP and the archives of WP:RSN). If a source isn't considered reliable, make sure that the nominator can justify having it in the article.
Second, you need to actually open some of the citations to check that a) the article is actually supported by the citations and doesn't include original research, and b) doesn't plagiarised (copy-pasted, or closely paraphrased) the sources. It's good practice to note the sources you have checked in the review, as this check (we call it a "source spot-check") is required in reviews. If you can't access some of the sources, ask the nominator to provide quotes.
Broad this is fairly easy—does the article include everything you expect to be told as a reader? Does it go into too much detail at any point? This is a bit subjective.
Neutral like you did with the MOS pages, check that the article meets everything in WP:NPOV.
Stable just make sure there haven't been edit wars or big disputes recently (also check the talk page)
Illustrated if the article has no images, try and see if some could be added; if it does, go to their pages to check that all looks ok with the basic parameters (year, source, author) and that the license looks alright. You'll rarely find problems here, but it's good to check.
In general, if you've checked something, note it down in the review, even if nothing was wrong in the end. This helps assure people that you have actually reviewed the article. I think that's a good starting point—how about you continue with the review now, and ping me when you think you're done (or earlier, if you need an opinion!) so I can look it over? Best of luck! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
; see Talk:Larrabee County, Iowa for comments about the article, and Talk:Larrabee County, Iowa/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of CosXZ -- CosXZ (talk) 04:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)