Talk:Winston Tunnel/GA1
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Pyrotec in topic GA Reassessment
GA Reassessment
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article is being reviewed as part of the WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2006, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant.Pyrotec (talk) 17:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC))
Summary
editGA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- 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:
- No images provided
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- No images provided
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
I recommend that this article retains it's GA status.Pyrotec (talk) 17:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)