Talk:Willie Mount/GA1

GA Review

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

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 01:25, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

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:

   • Everything looks good with this article, so I'm going to pass it to GA status. Very nice work! I apologize for taking so long with the review - computer gremlins are mainly to blame :) Dana boomer (talk) 17:14, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

   Thanks for the review! Hekerui (talk) 17:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)