Talk:Road to Europe/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GRAPPLE X 23:56, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Very few niggles here.
   "...mere jaded actors" -> "merely"
   Chattanooga Choo Choo should be in quotation marks as it's a song title, as "Chattanooga Choo Choo".

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   MOS is fine.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   References are mostly fine. I'd like to see the date of writing/publication for the websites cited, though, but that's about it.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   Scope here is fine, no problems with it.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutral

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Stable

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Images are fine. Two commons, so no worries with those, and the FUR for the screenshot seems solid.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Changes are slight, so I'm going to do them myself and put this through as a pass when I'm done. Well done!