Talk:SMS Babenberg/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) 15:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
See the comments for the SMS Habsburg article.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- 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:
- Copyedit done. Buggie111 asked me to check this one out. All is well now. NielsenGW (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Needs information for the Halpern book.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Copyedit done. Buggie111 asked me to check this one out. All is well now. NielsenGW (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)