Talk:St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Initial comments
[edit]I've had a quick read of the article, but have not yet checked any of the citations, etc; and, on that basis, the article appears to be at or about GA-standard. I'm, now going to work my way through the article section by section by leaving the WP:Lead until last. Pyrotec (talk) 13:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC) At this point I will only be highlighting "problems", if any although I may fix any trivial ones as I work my way through the article.
I found no "problems", so the rest of this subsection is blank. Pyrotec (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Overall summary
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A comprehensive, well-referenced, well-illustrated article.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- 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:
- Well illustrated, with most of the photographs provided by the nominator.
- 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:
I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing a fine article. Pyrotec (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)