Talk:John Benbow/GA1

GA Review

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

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 13:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments

Having fairly quickly scanned through the article, it appears to be quite a reasonable article. As it appears to be at or about GA-level I'll do a more detailed review, section by section but leaving the WP:lead until last, against WP:WIAGA. 13:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A comprehensive and wide ranging article. Compliant with WP:WIAGA

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Well referenced

   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:

   Well illustrated

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   An outstanding GA

Contratuations on the quality of the article. Its certainly of GA-standard; and possibly a strong contender for WP:FAC. I'm awarding GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 18:54, 30 August 2009 (UTC)