Talk:Texas Recreational Road 2/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 00:36, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Quality of the article is good.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Article complies with MoS.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Good.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   References support all statements included in the article.

   C. No original research:

   No original research found.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   All major aspects of the topic have been covered.

   B. Focused:

   Article remains focused throughout.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   No bias found.

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Article is stable.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   Image is tagged correctly.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Appropriate image is used with a suitable caption.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Pass!--Dom497 (talk) 00:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Nothing needs to be fixed on the nominators part. I have fixed the minor issues within the the article.--Dom497 (talk) 00:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)