Talk:Buhl Altarpiece/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 07:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Beginning

I am beginning my second Good Article review to determine whether or not the article in question, Buhl Altarpiece, passes muster and is worthy of the Green Plus. I will review this article according to the instructions provided here and confirm or deny that Buhl Altarpiece meets the Good Article criterion.

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

This article does indeed meet the criteria and, because of its small size, I have decided to immediately pass it on one condition: a citation is found and implemented for the final sentence of the last paragraph of the History section.

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   I personally do not doubt the authenticity of the article, but I do feel (given experience since my last review, oops!) that the above fret should be addressed and amended immediately.

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 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: