Talk:José de San Martín/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 19:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
- I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 19:40, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Initial comments
[edit]I've now completed a very quick read of this article. It appears to be well referenced (but I've not checked any), well illustrated, readable and comprehensive, so it appears to have a good change of making GA by the end of this review. Consequently, a "quick fail" is not appropriate here.
I'm now going to go through the article in a bit more depth, starting at the Early life section and finishing with the WP:Lead. This is likely to take at least a day or so. Note: at this stage I'm reviewing against WP:WIAGA and I will be mostly concentration on any "problems" that appear as I go through the sections. Pyrotec (talk) 21:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
- Early life -
- unnamed subsection -
- Looks compliant.
- Military career in Europe -
- Looks compliant.
- South America -
- Argentina -
- unnamed sub-subsection -
- Argentina -
- Looks compliant.
- San Lorenzo, Army of the North, Governor of Cuyo & Crossing of the Andes -
...stopping at this point. To be continued later. Pyrotec (talk) 22:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
- These four sub-subsections look to be compliant.
- Chile -
- Battle of Chacabuco, Patria Nueva, Battle of Cancha Rayada -
- Chile -
- These three sub-subsections look to be compliant.
- Battle of Maipú -
- Looks compliant.
- Peru & Guayaquil conference -
- These two subsections look to be compliant.
- Later life -
...stopping at this point. To be continued later. Pyrotec (talk) 17:27, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
- Looks compliant.
- Remains, Legacy & Lead -
- These three sections look to be compliant.
Overall summary
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A comprehensive & well illustrated article
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Yes, much of it is from Galasso (2000), but other references are also used.
- C. No original research:
- A. Has appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- Well illustrated with relevant and captioned images.
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
I'm happy to award this article GA-status.
It does not appear to have gone through WP:PR, so I would suggest that as the next step. I also think that this article could have potential at WP:FAC.
Congratulations on having produced a "fine" article. Pyrotec (talk) 18:29, 9 December 2012 (UTC)