Talk:Aboriginal title in California

Aboriginal title in California has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 6, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 16, 2011.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that courts have held that a Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo implementation statute extinguished all tribal aboriginal title in California?

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of North America

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Aboriginal title in California/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AGK [•] 19:14, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Concisely written; flows well.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Meets WP:V; no obvious factual errors or content of questionable accuracy.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The "Statehood" section reads "to create five militarized Indian reservations". As militarised is a somewhat general term, it would be useful if there could be some expansion on that. I would do it myself, but I'm not familiar enough with the subject matter.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Satisfies WP:NPOV
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
No ongoing edit wars or substantial expansion of the article. Incident is not a current one and is not rapidly unfolding.
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):
Generally, there is a sensible and engaging (if a little sparse) use of images. But the map in the lede has no key and its purpose was thus unclear to me. Is the various colours intended to simply demonstrate the variety of different Aboriginal territories that exist in California; and, if so, could that be made more clear in a caption, or at least on the image description page?
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Overall, this is a well-written article and will qualify for good article status once the areas I highlighted are remedied or clarified. Pending a response from the nominator (who I've notified), I'm placing this on hold for now. Good work! AGK [•] 19:14, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I hope my recent edits have resolved your concerns. Savidan 23:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's much better. I've passed the nomination. AGK [•] 15:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]