Talk:Albert Stanley, 1st Baron Ashfield/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: S Masters (talk) 13:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Article is well written and complies to WP:MoS.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Article appears to be stable.
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments: Overall, the article has a good chance of becoming a Good Article, however, minor grammar issues (particularly punctuation), prevent it from becoming one. You can see that I started to do a bit of the copy edit. I initially thought there were just a few, but it was more than I expected and I had to stop. I suggest getting a good copy editor to give this a once over to bring it up to standards. I will allow up to seven days for this to be completed before making any further decision.

I've checked through the article again and fixed a few extraneous commas and the like, and made some other minor copy edits. Let me know if there's anything else you can see. --DavidCane (talk) 00:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final summary: Thank you for all the hard work done on this. I am now satisfied that it meets all the requirements for a Good Article, and I am happy to pass it as such. -- S Masters (talk) 05:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]