Talk:Russian battleship Navarin/GA1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Dana boomer in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 22:49, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my initial comments up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 22:49, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- 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):
- File:RUS Battleship Navarin.jpg has absolutely no information, and a copyright tag that only applies if we know the death date of the author.
- This photo wasn't even in the article, but I'm now using File:Battleship Navarin.jpg which is sourced to Cassell's History of the Russo-Japanese War, published in 1905.
- The same applies to File:RUS Battleship Navarin underway.jpg
- Deleted this one.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
One prose niggle and (the main reason I'm holding instead of immediately passing) both images have licensing problems. Once these are addressed, I think the article should be good to go. Dana boomer (talk) 23:45, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
- OK, everything looks good, so now passing to GA. Dana boomer (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2012 (UTC)