Talk:Wellard/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 21:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

Reviewing the article against the "quick-fail criteria".

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

   • - the article is well sourced with a wide array of reference material.

2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

   • - no obvious NPOV tone to article.

3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

   • - no tags on page.

4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

   • - no edit warring over article.

5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

   • - scope of article clear.

Article meets standards set out in the "quick-fail criteria", with no obvious issues or problems evident. Full review will now follow. ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 21:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Main review

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   • Well written. Prose is concise and flows. Paragraphs well structured and developed. No fragments or stand-alone sentences.

   b (MoS):

   • Conforms to manual of style.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • Well referenced. No broken links. Citation templates correctly formated.

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • Citations are to third party publications. References reflect a range of sources.

   c (OR):

   • No evidence of OR.

3. It is broad in its scope.

   a (major aspects):

   • Addresses major aspect of article subject matter.

   b (focused):

   • Remains focused. No digressions.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:

   • No issues concerning POV evident.

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):

   • Images are properly tagged and justified.

   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   • Images are accompanied by contextual captions.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass

I was a little dubious this could be done, but have been proved wrong. The article is a well presented, informative piece on a very easily overlooked subject. Congratulations! ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 21:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your review, Junipers Liege, it's much appreciated! Frickative 23:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)