Talk:4th Parachute Brigade (United Kingdom)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Harrison49 (talk) 21:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article is well written and follows a good layout.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   References are well used.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article covers the major aspects and remains focused.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   The article maintains a neutral point of view.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   The article does not appear to be subject to any edit warring.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are well used and in the public domain.

7. Overall: A very good read and very interesting. Harrison49 (talk) 19:26, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Pass/Fail: