Talk:Blas Ople/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, I have reviewed this article for GA, and fixed a few little copy editing issues. I feel it fulfills the criteria of a GA. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): The writing is clear and concise b (MoS): Follows MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): The article is well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): The sources are reliable c (OR): No OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): Covers the major aspects of the subjects career and impact b (focused): Remains focused on the article topic

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: NPOV

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I congratulate the editors. A very nice, concise article.

—Mattisse (Talk) 21:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)