Talk:Republic of Ireland/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: DrKiernan (talk) 12:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this article does not meet the criteria in my opinion.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- It is verbose, for example the Etymology section is far longer than it needs to be since there is a daughter article that gives the detail.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- There are whole paragraphs without any citations.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- At over 150kb the page is really too long, and needs to be more focused on the main points. The article should employ Wikipedia:Summary style.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is difficult to judge the article's neutrality. There are unsourced claims in the history section, for example, that might be contentious.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- There are currently no edit-wars, but the article has been the subject of intense disruption in the past.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- The images look OK for the most part; File:Anglo-Irish Treaty signatures.gif is from the National Archives of Ireland but is tagged as created by the United Kingdom government, which looks odd but I guess it's correct.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I feel the article would benefit from pruning, and verification of the unsourced material.
- Pass/Fail: