Talk:Edward Coke/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
I will begin reading through this in a day or two. Sorry you had to wait a month for this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
A very clear pass, a rare article in which nothing major needs to be addressed. This is in my opinion in exceptionally sound condition and possibly would pass as a featured article with some minor edits. It certainly appears to be of the comprehension of a featured article. This is top work Ironholds, great job.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)