Talk:River Oaks, Houston/GA1

GA Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Review by Epicadam (talk) 23:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Looks good. The article is well-written with no obvious grammatical flaws or structural problems.

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   There was one dead URL but I went ahead and fixed it.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   Why are there two sets of figures under the demographics section? It looks strange to list both. Typically Wikipedia sticks with Census figures. I, too, would like to see more about the politics of the area besides the fact that it has a GOP rep in Congress.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Besides the two small items in the Demographics section, I think this is article is ready for GA status. Since the problems with the article from previous reviewers have been resolved and I'm the only other reviewer in the last week since the renomination, I will go ahead an move the article to GA.