Talk:Emil Lang/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):  Done b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):  Done b (citations to reliable sources):  Donec (OR): Done

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects):  Done b (focused):  Done

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:  Done

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:  Done

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  Done b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  Done}

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: yes

preliminary comments

• Talheim needs to be disambiguated. Also, you list Schaulen, Fritjof, in the bibliography, but I didn't find a cite for this source. I made some minor copy edits, mostly verbs and commas, and one confusing sentence. Auntieruth55 (talk) 20:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your help! I believe I addressed both the disambiguation and made good use of Schaulen by adding on fact I had missed before. Thanks so much. MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC)