Talk:Anthracite coal strike of 1902/GA1

Failed "good article" nomination

First, I would like to congratulate the editors involved on choosing a good topic and getting off to an excellent start. While I failed this article, I think it can be improved over time with a little effort to meet the criteria.

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 10, 2006, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: The only issue I have with the writing is the issue mentioned in the section above this review. The introduction should be two paragraphs that summarize the article. The run-on sentence structure in the introduction is also problematic.

2. Factually accurate?: The largest problem with this article is the wholesale lack of in-line citations. This is admittedly my first review, but I checked other candidates with reviews and see no chance for this article to make the status without at least one appropriate in-line citation per section. It would be preferable to have one in-line citation per paragraph.

3. Broad in coverage?: I am not aware of any major details that are missing in this article. It does an excellent job of setting out the context of the strike in light of prior strikes.

4. Neutral point of view?: The article does a good job with this matter. I do not get a feeling of bias, which is commendable because this article would definitely lend itself to advocacy.

5. Article stability? There are no issues here.

6. Images?: The use of appropriate images is wonderful.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Erechtheus 20:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)