Talk:Hue–Da Nang Campaign/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: one found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Well written and organized. I made a number of minor copy-edits.[2]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   I formatted one citation (ref#1); assume good faith for all off-line sources.

   I removed the EL, as per WP:EL, as it is already used as ref#1

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Sufficeinet detail and focus.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   NPOV

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   Suitable captions and rationales for non-free use.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   An excellent article. I am happy to list this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for assessing the article.Canpark (talk) 07:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)