Talk:The History of British Political Parties/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Jezhotwells in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 00:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Checking against GA criteria
edit- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
- The prose is good and thoroughly readable
- b (MoS):
- The article sufficiently complies with the manual of sytle
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
- One online reference checks out, I assume good faith for the print sources.
- b (citations to reliable sources):
- All sources appear to be WP:RS
- c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its scope.
- a (major aspects):
- It is a thorough description of the subject
- b (focused):
- The article remains focussed on its subject
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- The article is neutral
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- A suitable non-free use rationale has been provided
- b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- The image is captioned
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I have no hesitation is passing this as a good article. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: