Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2a4c1d73d56b071

Jump to content

Talk:Action of 9 July 1806

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Jackyd101 in topic GA Review
Good articleAction of 9 July 1806 has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 26, 2009Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Action of 9 July 1806/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)

This is a very nice article

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  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):
What photograph?--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
  1. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Not as smoothly written as some of your other articles, but still nicely done, and interesting.
Thanks for the review and copyedit, much appreciated. If you have any further comments please let me know.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)Reply