Talk:Abbotsford Bridge/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Fredddie (talk · contribs) 22:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I will review the article shortly. –Fredddie™ 22:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The lead seems a little short. There is a long history section yet there is only one sentence of history in the lead.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Overall pretty good, but I think the lead needs to reflect the length of the history section. –Fredddie™ 01:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Has been expanded, if you think it requires further expansion let me know (and some pointers of what needs more focus) -- Nbound (talk) 04:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

That's more like it. Passing now. –Fredddie™ 04:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)