Talk:Ethnic cleansing of Georgians in Abkhazia/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 20:59, 27 April 2013 (UTC) I'll give this one a go! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:59, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Some instances of broken or incorrect English, such as "UN Security Council passed series of resolutions in which it appeals for a cease-fire."
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lede is bunched up into a single sentence, and should be divided.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	There are various unreferenced statements.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	References have not been correctly formatted.
	2c. it contains no original research.	There are unreferenced statements; so potentially original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Apologies to be the bearer of bad news, because some good work has gone on here, but this is a clear fail, for the reasons I have outlined above. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]