User:Fritzmann2002/Notes/Samnites GAN

1. Quality of Writing
   1. Clarity
      1. "In the Samnite's free time, Samnites often hunted. This was not the only kind of entertainment practiced by the Samnites."
   2. Spelling & Grammar
   3. Manual of Style
      1. Lead
      2. Layout
      3. Words to Watch
      4. Fiction
      5. List incorporation
2. Verifiability
   1. Reflist style
   2. Reliability
   3. Original Research
   4. Copyvio
3. Coverage
   1. Main aspects
   2. Focus
4. Neutrality
5. Stability
6. Illustrations
   1. Tagging: Overall, the images are properly tagged and there is no copyvio on the article's part. Just a few small issues on the Commons end that need to be sorted out to ensure proper attribution and that all images are free use.
      1. "Loom weights with a fibula and a tweezers design.jpg" has an incorrect link to its source which needs to be corrected
      2. "Bronze Bull.png" has a very vague source, no link to where it was found, and questionable authorship which need to be addressed
   2. Relevancy
      1. The images improve the article greatly and are appropriate in almost all situations. However, I question the use of "Bronze Bull.png"; it is a very poor quality image and I have to believe there are better images on Commons which could better illustrate Samnite religion. Compounded with its tagging issues and the best option in my opinion is probably to find a replacement.
   3. Captions
      1. Most of the captions are good, but there are a few that I feel could be just a tad more specific; they don't give me as the reader a precise idea of what the image actually is. The ones that I might expand were "Oscan inscription", "Capua", "Colline Gates", "Samnite loom weight.", and "Samnite art".

• 
  Public domainY
• 
  Public domainY
• 
  Public domainY (derivative of Ancient Samnium.jpg)
• 
  Properly licensedY
• 
  Public domainY
• 
  Public domainY
• 
  Public domainY (could use a crop though)
• 
  NImage is licensed under CC-BY-4.0 according to Commons, which would be fine because of the Met's open access policy, but the link in the description does not go to the image's page on the Met's website, so it can't be verified to have been published by them just from the Commons page. A quick search didn't lend me results but I'd bet it was just a typo in the link or a moved web page
• 
  Ineligible for copyrightY
• 
  Properly licensedY
• 
  NLicensed as CC-BY-4.0, but no specific links to where the image was found, who actually made it (not an own work). Its free use needs to be verified
• 
  Properly licensedY
• 
  Properly licensedY
• 
  Public domainY
• 
  Properly licensedY
• 
  Properly licensedY