Talk:Ruth Norman/GA1

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

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 03:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll take this! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

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.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
	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.	Fine
	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).	Fine
	2c. it contains no original research.	Fine
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Fine
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Fine
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Fine
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Per definition
	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.	See below
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pending

Comments

1

• "In her early to mid-teen years, she labored as a fruit packer and a maid, giving most of her income to her father, who she later described as abusive." - A lot of clauses. Could you split this?
  • Sure, split. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Unarius' or Unarian?
  • Not sure which is best, but I've standardized them. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Diana Tumminia - What's she do?
  • I'm not too sure what you're looking for here, I noted that she published a study of the group in 2005 though. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Using this talent - Typing as a talent? Really?
  • Hmm, I was trying not to repeat "skill", rephrased. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Seeking to popularize his channeling, in 1954, Ernest and Ruth an organization," - Missing a word.
  • Ahh, good catch. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Ioshanna... does this have a meaning?
  • Possibly, but not that I've noticed in the sources. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Michiel - link to Michael (archangel), assuming they're the same? Same with Raphael (archangel). Perhaps a link to archangel too.
  • I presume they're the same, or similar enough to justify a link. I'm sure Unarius has some novel perspectives on these angels. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "property near Jamul, California, to serve as a landing site for the Space Brothers." - You didn't explain who the Space Brothers are yet
  • Good catch, moved the explanation. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "six core myths" - Myths or beliefs?
  • There more or less the same in terms of the study of religion, but I rephrased for clarity. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Weber's concept of charismatic leadership." - Who?
  • Explained, and it turns out we have an article on the concept too. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Perhaps merge "last years" and 80s under one heading
  • Sure, that works. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I did a copyedit, be sure to double check.
  • Looks good, only one error introduced. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Fix disambiguation needed tag. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:39, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hadn't realized that there were two people named James R. Lewis with articles, wow. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2

• I'm a bit concerned about the heavy reliance (overwhelming majority of footnotes) on Tumminia as a reference. It seems that a broader-based reference set would be preferable.--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That would be a good idea for the peer review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

6

• Any images at all possible? Even fair-use ones of her? Image of Tesla (like this)? Image of the Unarius Academy of Science?
  • Yeah, I had been meaning to add one of Ruth in, hadn't gotten around to it though. Just uploaded File:Ernest and Ruth Norman.jpg. Tesla's a good idea. I should check if there are any Wikipedians in the area that could get a pic of their headquarters. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• AGF on offline sources.

In the introductory paragraph it is stated that Norman was a native of California, but in the "Early Life and Marriage" paragraph it states that she was born in Indiana. This seems contradictory. ;Lawrence Ames (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.124.92.254 (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further discussion

• On hold for a week. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Looks peachy, passing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]