Talk:Better Government Association/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grammarxxx (talk · contribs) 21:12, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Doesn't adhere to MoS, including references.

A. References to sources:
No in-line citations: accessdate, author, work, ect...

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Majority of works cited is to the subjects webpage, not a RS.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
Definitely not, this organizations been around for nearly 100 years and this is all there is?

B. Focused:
Too many minor details.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Impossible without RS.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I am quickfailing this article due to a lack of comprehensiveness and poor references that cannot be fixed within 7 days. This article was created yesterday by a new user, I suggest the user read over the good article criteria before nominating any other articles. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 21:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]