Talk:Petition of Right/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Harej (talk · contribs) 23:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will be the reviewer for this article. hare j 23:05, 13 October 2011 (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): No complaints to register.

b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Total compliance.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): Yes

b (citations to reliable sources): Yes

c (OR): No original research.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): Covers everything about the Petition of Right from soup to nuts.

b (focused): Each of the aspects are described in full detail.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: Yes.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: No edit wars, nor do I anticipate any cropping up unless there's a resurgence in Stuart loyalists, but I am surprised at the amount of vandalism this article gets. This, however, is not an issue, for vandalism is promptly reverted.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): Yes

b (appropriate use with suitable captions): Yes
Overall:
Pass/Fail: Article approved with no revision required. hare j 23:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]