Talk:Siege of Damascus (634)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 10:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 10:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Initial comments

After a quick couple of read throughs, this appears to be a reasonably-comprehensive, well-referenced article of about GA-standard. In passing, I think that the WP:Lead needs a bit of work done; but I normally leave the review of the lead until last, so I will delay any detailed comments on that until I've completed my review of the main body of the article.

I will now carry out a more detailed review. Pyrotec (talk) 20:31, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

• Background -

• I've done a few copyedits on grammar. This section is generally compliant. Pyrotec (talk) 12:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

• The siege -

• I've done a few copyedits on grammar. This section is generally compliant. Pyrotec (talk) 12:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

• Khalid's attack & Aftermath -

These two sections are generally compliant. Pyrotec (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

• WP:Lead -

• I've done a few copyedits on grammar. This section is generally compliant, but a bit more work would help improve it. Pyrotec (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

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:

Congratulations on the quality of the article, its now a GA. Pyrotec (talk) 12:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)