This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Canada: Ontario Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.

George Rolph

• ... that while George Rolph (pictured) sued six of his assailants in the Ancaster incident for ₤1000 each, the trial only awarded him ₤20 from two of the assailants?

• ALT1: ... that in the Ancaster incident, a mob composed of the Family Compact attacked George Rolph (pictured) for allegedly having an affair? Source: Multiple
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Sarah Pike Conger
• Comment: Second qpq: Template:Did you know nominations/Gilbert Eastman. Ancaster Incident was an article creation.

Z1720 (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC). Both articles:[reply]

Overall: Epicgenius (talk) 14:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ancaster incident/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Z1720 (talk · contribs) 02:49, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Noleander (talk · contribs) 03:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. 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):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Overall, looks great! I foresee no difficulty getting GA on this.

• Should have a "short description" near top... helps with Search functions, and some other stuff (e.g. See Also). Example:

{{short description|A few words helping to distinguish from other articles with similar names}}

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 04:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I cannot tell how famous this incident is in Canada. Is it a big deal? People learn about it in school? Or is it a fairly local/obscure incident? No big deal, but if you could add a few words in Lead or Legacy to give readers a sense of how important/obscure this is, that would be helpful.

• It's obscure, but sources haven't really discussed its importance in that way. When it is discussed, its in comparisons to other attacks against Reform politicians, which is already in the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Article has multiple blue links for same item: Legislative Assembly of Upper Canada ... ideally one max.

• Done. Z1720 (talk) 04:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Nice to see "alt" text for the photos, I know visually impaired users of WP love that!! Could you make the alt text better for them? The rule of thumb is that alt text should not repeat the caption, instead it should paint a picture with words. Example:

alt=A formal painting of an aristocratic balding man, about 60 years old, wearing a red coat, sitting in an elegant wooden chair

• MOS:ALT says, "Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush"." It specifically says that information about fashion should only be used if it is a concern in the article, and the article does not speak about the fashion of the subjects. Z1720 (talk) 04:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Fair enough. Noleander (talk) 05:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Phrase tar and feather has two blue links

Noleander (talk) 03:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pssing this: I cannot find anything else amiss with the article:

• • Images are not copyrighted & have captions
  • No prose or grammar issues
  • Everything is cited
  • References look good
  • Format is clean & consistent

Noleander (talk) 14:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]