Talk:Percy Henn

message: This one isn't quite up to GA standards yet, see my peer review for reasoning.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 16:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know who assessed this but there is no way it is up to B-class, more like start.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 01:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted pending discussion. My understanding is that Henn is a fairly obscure figure for which little information is available. Thus, even though the article is short, everything seems to have been covered, and there are no key elements missing. I should think it would prove useful to the majority to people visiting in search of information on Henn. Hence B would seem most appropriate per Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Assessment#Quality scale. Hesperian 02:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Ah, I see.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 08:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA nom

message: There's a Henn close in Winthrop, Western Australia since winthrop is associated with UWA I wonder whether HEnn close is named after Percy Henn. The question is where to find such information to provide a cite for its inclusion in the article. Gnangarra 08:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess there would be a source in the UWA library... Seventy dot 03:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  legacy 

message: Feel free to resubmit it if you think it qualifies. I don't review the same articles twice, see what someone else thinks.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 11:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Though I must say the concerns I noted were more the enough reason to fail it, GA criteria 1 is "well written" and GA criteria 4 is NPOV, both of which were concerns I noted on my peer review. I would definitely address those if I were the one resubmitting it, just my two cents.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 11:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When I reviewed the GACriteria, I didn't think NPOV was a problem... but I'm looking for any suggestion. Auroranorth (WikiDesk) 11:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Those weasel words was all I noted...anyway, on that, mostly the prose was my concern, I have made a couple additional notes on the peer review. Like I said I won't be the one reviewing it next time (because I thnk articles get better and better the more eyes that look at them) but I am willing to point out anything I notice, I won't mess with geographic locales, promise, I'll just mention if something is confusing here or on the review page. : )A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 11:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA

message: I am relisting the article for GA review. Auroranorth (WikiDesk) 11:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Resubmission

message: This article falls outside the scope of this next release.  However, it will be automatically considered for later, larger releases. Walkerma 04:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Version 0.7

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
*If this article is about a person, please add  along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.[?]
*As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), please do not link words in headings.[?]
*Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.[?]
*This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.[?]
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Auroranorth (!) 10:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I have completed the suggestions shown here. Auroranorth (!) 10:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automated peer review 1 

message: This article is being brought to WP:GAR. Auroranorth (!) 11:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GAR 

message: It meets the criteria so it gets a pass, but there are a two things I would like to see work on:
*Grammatical and MoS errors. I corrected as many as I saw going through, but keep an eye out for proper formatting and writing in this article.
*It is a very short article. It doesn't appear to omit anything major, but I would definitely like to see more detailed content.
Good job. Let me know if there are any problems or questions. Dylan (talk) 05:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Article: pass 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Percy Henn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070829181636/http://www.ccgs.wa.edu.au/newsite/page/body/news_cal/content/feature/feature24/text/text.html to http://www.ccgs.wa.edu.au/newsite/page/body/news_cal/content/feature/feature24/text/text.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified