Jump to content

Talk:Strensham services/GA2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA reveiw

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. 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:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Whilst many of the defects/comments raised in the last GAreview had merit, the article has been improved and is now more deserving of a GA.Pyrotec (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank you for appreciating the work that I have put into this, and in the past week all the work you have put into it yourself to bring it that last little mile :) I feel the need to dig out an appropriate barnstar here. Jenuk1985 | Talk 22:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]