Talk:Coatbridge/GA1

GA Review

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

Starting GAreview.Pyrotec (talk) 19:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A comprehensive, well-referenced, well-illustrated article.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Well referenced, but some work on reference formating is still needed.

   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:

Congratulations on the article. I'm rating it as GA-class.Pyrotec (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)