Talk:Windows 2.1/GA1
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Vacant0 in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: GeoffreyT2000 (talk · contribs) 03:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
I will check the criteria now. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
I think that cybernetnews.com is not a reliable source. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've removed that one. Is there anything else that has to be fixed? Vacant0 (talk) 09:02, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- I checked all the remaining sources, and I could not find any unreliable ones. So, I will make this article a GA pass now. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 13:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! Vacant0 (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- I checked all the remaining sources, and I could not find any unreliable ones. So, I will make this article a GA pass now. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 13:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)