# Talk:NLRB v. J. Weingarten, Inc.

I am going to pass this article as Good Article. It clearly explains the events leading up to and following the NLRB ruling. There is still a lot of work until FA though. More references are needed, perhaps some cases relying on this ruling. Dagomar 00:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

My review is complete.
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
It is stable.

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
Overall:
a Pass/Fail: 
Just a tiny problem. "As a result the changing decisions of the NLRB over time, while workers who are not union members do not currently have the right to the presence of a representative during management inquiries, it is unclear whether that will be true in the future." What is the word "currently" mean? Give a date or year. OhanaUnitedTalk page 04:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards,Ruslik 07:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Lede fails WP:LEAD, does not adequately summarize entire contents of article. -- Cirt (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)