Talk:Treaty of Ciudad Juárez/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Noraft in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC) Links check out. Article looks good. I did a bit of copyediting. Will go over it a little more carefully in a second pass, and if everything checks out, should be able to promote it. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- I added a [citation needed] tag. If you can put a citation there, we'll be ready to promote. Nice article. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- I must have overlooked it. The info is also in the sources already in the article. I added the relevant inline citations.radek (talk) 10:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Well written, well covered. Let me know when you nominate it for FA.
- Pass or Fail:
ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 12:56, 12 April 2010 (UTC)