Talk:British Alpine Hannibal Expedition/GA1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Cliftonian in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Cliftonian (talk · contribs) 14:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: none
Linkrot: all external links work without problems
Checking against GA criteria
edit- 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:
- Just a couple of tiny quirks here in the prose which I have amended; otherwise the prose was fine. References and citations are all fine and there is no original research present. The coverage is broad and comprehensive. There is no point of view present. There is significant recent work but it is almost all by the nominator and is all productive. Images check out without problems. Overall, this is a pass, with just a couple of very small problems which I fixed in under a minute. Well done, Stephan, and keep up the good work. —Cliftonian (talk) 14:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: