Talk:A1 in London/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

This article is being reviewed as part of the WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2007, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant.Pyrotec (talk) 19:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A comprehensive, well-illustrated, well-referenced article

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
The prose is reasonable, although there are number of short one & two-sentence paragraphs that could do with some attention.

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Some web links are tagged as {{dead link}}

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
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:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

This article could do with some attention, particular those links already marked as {{dead link}}, but on balance, this article is still GA-class. I'm marking it as WP:GAR - Keep. Pyrotec (talk) 20:38, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]