Talk:1976 Big Thompson River flood/GA1
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Tails Wx (talk · contribs) 18:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: OhHaiMark (talk · contribs) 13:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
So far, this fulfills all the criteria.
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
- a (reference section):
b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- 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):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I'm passing the article. All of the sources are reliable, with even the "In popular culture" section being sourced. There are no grammar mistakes, the article's image is free-use, the article is stable, all the citations support each sentence, and most importantly, it's broad and neutral in its coverage. Have a good day. OhHaiMark (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.