Talk:5 euro note/GA2
Appearance
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Reference #9 is a dead link. Has been dead since 2012-07-01. Done
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- 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, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comment
[edit]So mainly what was to be done on 100 euro note, am I right? – Plarem (User talk) 12:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Done – Plarem (User talk) 12:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes since most of them use the same text and refs. ObtundTalk 15:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)