Talk:Tessarakonteres/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jackyd101 (talk · contribs) 17:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
GA on hold
[edit]Hi. I almost passed this straight up, but then I looked it over again and I think the lede needs a little work - as it is, I don't feel that it adequately introduces the articles yet. It works on the assumption that the ship may be fictional, but doesn't really explain that assumption. Can you insert a sentence or two summarising the historical sources who mention it and a little bit on Casson's modern analysis? Once that is done I'll be happy to pass it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- 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):
- Lede needs a nudge - see above.
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
Note: the user who nominated this hasn't edited wikipedia in over a month, and usually in these situations I would fail the article. However, as I note above, the article is actually quite close to passing and I'm reluctant to simply fail and move on when a few tweaks are enough. In the end I simply decided to expand the lede myself, which I know is bending the rules a little, but what the hell. So, with an expanded lede, this article now passes GA. If you object, I'll see you at GAR. Best--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)