# Talk:Paul S. Walsh

This review is transcluded from Talk:Paul S. Walsh/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 12:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
I cleaned up the references. Some small fixes need to be made before I resume:
External links: "Independent article September 2005" is dead
I removed it as I was unable to find an archive.--GoPTCN 09:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
How reliable is ref 24?--GoPTCN 11:11, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
I removed the references as the prior reference contains that information.--GoPTCN 09:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
The title in ref 4 is missing. As I don't have access to The Times you have to edit it.--GoPTCN 11:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Ok, fixed.--GoPTCN 09:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Not sure if the mention of his favourite beer is not trivial, but I skip it
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

The file File:PSWsignature.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:DECORATIVE non-free use in Paul S. Walsh which fails WP:NFCC#8. Walsh doesn't seem to be particularly noted for having some kind of unique or artistic signature and there's no sourced critical commentary about his signature anywhere in the article about him. So, it's unclear how seeing this signature significantly improves the reader's understanding of Walsh to the degree that not seeing the signature would be detrimental to that understanding.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)