Talk:1905 International Tourist Trophy/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR 21:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguations: No links found.
Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.
Checking against the GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- "Initially, it was decided that each car was only allowed to use one imperial gallon (4.5 l)" - how come this isn't written out fully as litres?
- "While the majority of cars were British, there were also entries from France, including a Vinot-Deguingand and a Peugeot and the United States, including a pair of White steam cars and a Cadillac." - unsourced
- I would recommend splitting the Practice section into two paragraphs, to make it more comfortable for the reader
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- No original research found.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
This article is well written, comprehensive and well sourced. I couldn't find anything enough to put this on hold, so I'll pass it now as it meets the criteria. Good work! JAGUAR 22:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC)