Talk:Noble train of artillery/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Sturmvogel 66 in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
Shouldn't this have an infobox?
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- Well, I knew that {{Infobox military conflict}} and other military infoboxes didn't apply. But I did find {{Infobox historical event}}, which seems to fit the bill. Magic♪piano 14:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
- That works for me.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)