Talk:Abbotsford Bridge
Appearance
Abbotsford Bridge has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: September 16, 2013. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Abbotsford Bridge appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 September 2013, and was viewed approximately 2,150 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Abbotsford Bridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Fredddie (talk · contribs) 22:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
I will review the article shortly. –Fredddie™ 22:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Overall pretty good, but I think the lead needs to reflect the length of the history section. –Fredddie™ 01:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Done - Has been expanded, if you think it requires further expansion let me know (and some pointers of what needs more focus) -- Nbound (talk) 04:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- That's more like it. Passing now. –Fredddie™ 04:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Engineering and technology good articles
- GA-Class Australia articles
- Low-importance Australia articles
- GA-Class New South Wales articles
- Low-importance New South Wales articles
- WikiProject New South Wales articles
- GA-Class Australian Transport articles
- Low-importance Australian Transport articles
- WikiProject Australian Transport articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- GA-Class Bridge and Tunnel articles
- Low-importance Bridge and Tunnel articles
- WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels articles
- GA-Class Australia road transport articles
- Low-importance Australia road transport articles
- GA-Class Road transport articles
- Low-importance Road transport articles
- GA-Class New South Wales road transport articles
- Low-importance New South Wales road transport articles
- New South Wales road transport articles
- New South Wales road articles without KML
- WikiProject Australian Roads articles without needs-map
- Australia road articles without KML
- WikiProject Australian Roads articles
- Wikipedia Did you know articles