Talk:Walter Ohmsen/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: auntieruth (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I've made some copy edits. please confirm that what I've written is what you meant.

   Checked! Looks good MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

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:

   Nice job on this. I've added a sentence to the lead to establish why this particular man was notable, not only for his decorations. In a couple other places, there was some verb and word choice issue, please check it. Otherwise, I'm ready to pass. auntieruth (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

   Looks good, Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)