Jump to content

Talk:Tom Weisner/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Hi! I guess I'll take this one for review as well. I'm trying to work through some of the backlog in the politics section...it's insane to have to wait over a month and a half for a review... Dana boomer (talk) 01:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    A few prose and MOS issues, so I am placing this article on hold. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 01:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks good, so I'm passing the article to GA status. Nice work, and thanks for the prompt response. Dana boomer (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]