Talk:The History of the Fairchild Family/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

   • 

2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

   • 

3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

   • 

4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

   • 

5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

   • 

All OK, start substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:25, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   • Well written, I made a couple of minor copy edits to remove unnecessary emphasis

   b (MoS):

   • Fine

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • Well referenced.

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • Reliable sources, assume good faith for content.

   c (OR):

   • No OR

3. It is broad in its scope.

   a (major aspects):

   • It appears broad in scope and ....

   b (focused):

   • ....focussed

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   • Follows a NPOV

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

   • No edit warring

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

   • Theree pd images, correctly tagged

   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   • Suitable captions used

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   • Pass, maintain GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:38, 27 June 2009 (UTC)