Talk:HMS Hereward (H93)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 13:50, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Is "refuelled" Brit-English? (as opposed to "refueled")

   You know, I don't know? My unconscious habit is to always double the terminal "1" when putting the word in past tense. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

   I only noticed it because I checked for typos in the editing window - Firefox underlined it and suggested it should be one "l". Parsecboy (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

   There are a few dabs that should be hidden (Valiant and Orion, maybe the title for John Buchan, forex)

   Done.

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:

   Just a couple of little things to check. Parsecboy (talk) 13:50, 26 October 2011 (UTC)