Talk:7th Battalion (Australia)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk) 09:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Progression
[edit]- Version of the article when originally reviewed: [1]
- Version of the article when review was closed: [2]
Technical review
[edit]- Citations: no errors found
- Disambiguations: none found - [3]
- Linkrot: Ext links all work - [4]
- Alt text: Images all have alt text (although this is not a requirement for GA anyway) - [5]
Criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation):
b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned):
b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):
c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain':
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
- I have made a few tweaks for prose otherwise this is an excellent article that I feel meets the GA critera. Happy to pass. Anotherclown (talk) 09:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)