Talk:SMS Prinz Eugen (1912)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ~NerdyScienceDude 22:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article shortly. ~NerdyScienceDude 22:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   Looks good.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   More citations in the "Construction" section would be nice.

   Fixed. Added some Conway's and Sokol's.--White Shadows ^{Your guess is as good as mine} 23:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   No problems here.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Looks neutral to me.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars detected.

6. 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):

   Images look good and illustrate the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Looks good, but I have one comment pointed out above. I will pass it once the comment has been responded to. ~NerdyScienceDude 23:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It looks good, so I'll pass it. Congratulations! ~NerdyScienceDude 23:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)