Talk:SM UB-14/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I have reviewed this article. I found no gaping holes, MOS issues or anything substantial. The prose flows quite smoothly. Just one issue:
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- No mention of the year in the Aegean sea section. It might confuse the reader a bit. At least one would be nice.
- Done. — Bellhalla (talk) 10:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- No mention of the year in the Aegean sea section. It might confuse the reader a bit. At least one would be nice.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
- Thanks - DSachan (talk) 09:22, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- I've addressed the one issue you raised above. Thanks for the review. — Bellhalla (talk) 10:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)