Talk:U.S. Route 161/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 15:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- No issues here
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- All fine.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Rarely an issue with this type of article
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Unless you're edit-warring with yourself, this has to be stable
- 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):
- Looks good.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- No issues with the article that preclude GA status. Imzadi 1979 → 16:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: