Jump to content

Talk:Edinburgh town walls/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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 09:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 09:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


A Good Article

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    Well referenced.
    C. No original research:
    Well referenced.
  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:
    Well illustrated.
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    Well illustrated.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


An interesting and informative article. There is a bit of information: in Stevenson, Sylvia; Simpson, Anne Turner and Holmes, Nicholas (1981). Historical Edinburgh, Canongate & Leith: the archaeological implications of development. Scottish Burgh Survey. Ancient Monuments Inspectorate, Scottish Development Department, that could you could possibly add to this article; but there is nothing that appears to contradict what you have in the article.

Notwithstanding the above comment, this article is compliant with the requirments for GA; so I'm awarding GA-status. Congratulations on acheiving GA. Pyrotec (talk) 10:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]