Talk:Brazilian monitor Pará/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Skinny87 (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   'The monitor had to be beached after passing the fortress to prevent her from sinking.' - What damage was inflicted to her to require this?

   Not specified. Tamandare took over 120 hits so I expect that it was damage from the Paraguayan guns.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

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've got a single question for you to answer, and then I can pass this baby. Skinny87 (talk) 07:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)