Talk:Christopher Greenup/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

And I guess I'll take this one too! I don't know if I'll get through both reviews by tonight, but if not, I'll have this one finished by tomorrow morning at the latest. Dana boomer (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Everything looks great with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Nice work! Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 02:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]