Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jclemens (talk · contribs) 05:25, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.	Some issues identified
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	No issues noted.
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.	Appropriate
	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).	Appropriate
	2c. it contains no original research.	None seen.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Nothing seen with Earwig's tool.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Appropriate.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	No coatracks noted.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No issues noted.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Nothing noted.
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.	fair use image acceptable for deceased subject.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	No issues. "File:Mao-4armjunction-schematic.png" says it should be replaced with the .svg version, but that's not a GA criterion.
	7. Overall assessment.	Passing per improvements in prose.

First read through

• "Four years later the family settled in the elder Dirks' hometown" Who? His dad's hometown? I think that's right but I'm still not sure. Should be clarified/simplified, please.

 Done Changed to "Michael's" Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• "he received the top score of 5 on every Advanced Placement exam he took" How many was that? What were they? Means something very different if he took 5 AP exams vs. only one.

I wish we could say more, but that's all the source in question gives us. It doesn't say how many. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK Jclemens (talk) 02:48, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• "chosen as class valedictorian in 1996" The chosen valedictorian is often the student with the highest ranking among his/her graduating class., but is an honor bestowed on the student having the highest GPA.

"The chosen valedictorian is often the student with the highest ranking among his/her graduating class." Again, this is as his obituary in the Spokesman-Review describes it. Our own article describes it as a chosen position, not always based on academic accomplishment: ""'In other schools, the position may be elected by the school body or appointed directly by the school administration based on various systems of merit." Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK Jclemens (talk) 02:48, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• "shortly after graduation Robert and three of his classmates learned that their entry in the ExploraVision national scientific contest was one of three high school winners earning them and their families a trip to Washington, D.C." Their learning of the victory is a transient event, and I would rephrase that to focus on the enduring value of that early achievement, not the joy of finding out.

 Done rephrased. Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• The whole last paragraph in the early life section, about his college and graduate school, seems to have needlessly complex sentences.

 Done Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 23:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• There's quite a bit of overlinking going on. Train station? Raise? I'd avoid hiding concepts behind words like that.

 Done Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 23:09, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a lot of prose, and most of it is OK, but there's ample room for some polishing here. Jclemens (talk) 05:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Placing this on hold for a prose review, everything else looks fine. Jclemens (talk) 05:49, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... and that's a pass. Thanks! Jclemens (talk) 04:45, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]