Talk:Faidherbe Bridge/GA2

GA Review 2

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Writing needs work. Numerous MoS breaches, as well. First, the lead is way too long. Also, numbers under 10 need to be spelled out. References need to be formatted properly, as well.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   This is where the real problem is. The entire body of the article is unreferenced.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article's fairly short. any more information that could be included?

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, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

This article needs a lot of work before it can be listed as a GA. Because of the issues mentioned above, I failed the article. It can be renominated once these issues are addressed. Cheers. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)