Talk:Holocaust victims/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SilverplateDelta (talk · contribs) 13:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will be filled in as I progress with the review.

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 (reference section):

b (citations to reliable sources):

c (No original research):

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.: I recommend suggesting the article for temporary semi-protection.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): All but 1 images are in the public domain. The odd one out is the work of the poster.

b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

—I see an edit war in this articles future. The page has been vandalized 4 times in the past week. This will detract from the over all score. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SilverplateDelta (talk • contribs) 13:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have been watching the article, the issue seems to have been resolved, therefore PASSING its GA review.