Talk:Battle of Beaufort/GA1

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Magicpiano in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sp33dyphil (talk · contribs) 12:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  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):  
  7. Overall:
    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)Reply