Talk:Mount Vernon Triangle Historic District/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: JackFromReedsburg (talk · contribs) 00:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I will be reviewing this article. I'll leave some more in-depth comments later. 00:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   2 images have fair use rationales, but other than that all are in a compatible CC license

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

The article is well written with good sources. It is well illustrated. Copyvio check came up clean, and the only potential issue was a quote. "Table of contributing buildings" may be better titled as "List of contributing buildings", but at that point its just personal preference. 2 images have fair use rationales, both of the demolished buildings. It would be nice to have a "NRHP in Washington D.C." navbox on the bottom, but is not absolutely required. I'm not seeing anything that would prevent this article from becoming a GA, so I'll be promoting it. JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 01:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking the time to review the article. APK whisper in my ear 20:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)