Talk:Indiana General Assembly/GA2

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   "The Senate and House of Representatives are subdivided into several committees"--is it really subdivided, as in each assembly member is a member of exactly one committee, or does it have a series of committee and subcommittee membership like congress? In detailing the incumbent officers, the article mixes past and present tense--standardize on one.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. 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):

   Good to see wikitables, and thanks for fixing the image tagging.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I made a few wording tweaks, but this arrived very ready for a GA review. Drop me a note when you fix the prose issues--you're within a whisker of a pass. Good job! ON HOLD for up to a week. Jclemens (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

1. There are no "sub-committees" as I understand it. There are about a two dozen different committees, and membership overlaps quite a bit. I have changed the wording to better reflect that. Subdivided was a poor description.
2. I have changed all the verb tenses to present. Perhaps they should be past tense though?

Let me know if there is anything more! Thanks for you review. Charles Edward 02:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)