Talk:Battle of Beaufort/GA1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Magicpiano in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sp33dyphil (talk · contribs) 12:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
- "Battle of Beaufort, or the Battle of Port Royal Island, was" Missing commas. Fixed
- "February 3, 1779, near" Again, missing commas; please check throughout. Fixed
- Why's "Brigadier General" wikified but "Major General" isn't? Fixed
- MoS calls for the inclusion of alt text. Fixed
- No dead links (no action required)
- No dabs (no action required)
Thanks for taking the time to review. Is there more coming? Magic♪piano 18:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)