Talk:Craigmillar Castle/GA1

GA Review

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Initial review

A good article, the only "problem" so far is a missing reference for Lindsay.Pyrotec (talk) 19:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Maurice Lindsay now added to the bibliography, thanks for spotting. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

GAR

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   A good read

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations. You now have GA.Pyrotec (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)