Talk:HMAS Australia (1911)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

Having had an initial quick couple of read throughs, this looks to be at or about GA-level. I will now start a more detailed review. Pyrotec (talk) 13:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

There's a lot of information in it.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Well referenced.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Well referenced.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
There does not appear to be any edit wars; however the article appears to have undergone two moves and a major merge operation about three hours before it was submitted to WP:GAN, but a diff of the versions before and after show no change !!!!!
That would be your fault for reviewing it so fast. ;) No, I histmerged in the version Sturm and Saberwyn had been working on in Saber's sandbox. It will be stable now. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 19:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Well illustrated.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Well illustrated.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding the article GA-status. It appears to have potential at WP:FAC. Pyrotec (talk) 16:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]