Talk:SMS Árpád/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Comments are much the same as they were for the SMS Habsburg article since it's just a copy of that article.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- Copyedit done. Buggie111 asked me check this out. All is well now. NielsenGW (talk) 02:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Needs a full citation for #9, Halpern.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually you'll be OK if you list Halpern in the sources as your formatting is correct if the info is given there.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Done on both articles. Buggie111 (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually you'll be OK if you list Halpern in the sources as your formatting is correct if the info is given there.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Needs a full citation for #9, Halpern.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Copyedit done. Buggie111 asked me check this out. All is well now. NielsenGW (talk) 02:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)