Talk:Giovanni Caselli/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CommanderWaterford (talk · contribs) 17:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doug, thank you for your work at this article - I will review this article within the next couple of days and inform you as soon as possible. Have a good week meanwhile, Best, CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CommanderWaterford: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·