Talk:Compliance requirements/GA1
Appearance
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I repaired one dead link and tagged two others for which no archived version could be found using WP:CHECKLINKSDone
- a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- No images used
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
Just two dead links to be addressed. On hold for seven days, major contributors and projects will be notified.- OK, dead links have been removed. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)