Hello! I will be reviewing your article. Tagging @
Rcsprinter123:
Per the guidelines at
WP:WIAGA, 1.Well-written✓Pass
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and
understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct ✓Pass It is very clear and concise. Anyone who knows nothing about
Tom Kilburn can find meaningful content on this page.
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline✓Pass There are no blogs, or anything of the sort that is not verifiable.
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 Great job! They are all reliable sources.
2c. it contains
no original research✓Pass There is no original research. Everything is linked to a reliable source.
2d. it contains no
copyright violations or
plagiarism✓Pass Accoring to here
[1], there is a little bit of a copyright violation, but that is a reliable source that is cited.
3.Broad in its coverage✓Pass
3a. it addresses the
main aspects of the topic ✓Pass The article is very broad. The article does address the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style) ✓Pass The does go a little into detail, but it is fine. (Nothing a little editing can't fix.)
4.Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each ✓Pass Per
WP:NPOV, there are no opinions or anything of that sort. 5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute ✓Pass I have checked the edit history, and there are no edit wars going on. Great Job! 6.Illustrated, if possible, by media such as
images,
video, or
audio✓Pass There are many images in the article.
Please make the spelling of words so that they follow British or American spelling.
This is what I have reviewed. If you can fix those extra things, I will pass the article. Thanks!
Yoshi24517ChatOnline 23:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)reply
@
Yoshi24517: This article has 9,585 characters readable prose, so per
WP:LEADLENGTH, it should have a lead of one or two paragraphs. I have doubled it in length to two paragraphs. I have run a spelling check on the article, and I think we have corrected all the spelling errors. Hope this addresses all the issues.
Hawkeye7 (
talk) 03:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)reply
@
Hawkeye7: I'm a little busy, so I won't be able to pass the article until tomorrow. I'll check for anything else that need fixing.
Yoshi24517ChatOnline 05:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)reply
@
Hawkeye7: I found the quote you put near the bottom of the article. Please put quotations marks on the quote that the article has. Thanks!
Yoshi24517ChatOnline 22:49, 3 March 2016 (UTC)reply