Talk:Wittelsbach class battleship/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- Flip the armament in the infobox to list the size in cm first to match the text.
- Fixed. Parsecboy (talk) 02:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Flip the armament in the infobox to list the size in cm first to match the text.
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Add the fates of the rest of the class to the main body.
- Not sure how I managed to overlook this in the first place, but I've fixed it now. Thanks for pointing that out. Parsecboy (talk) 02:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Add the fates of the rest of the class to the main body.
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
