Talk:Roman Dmowski/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 22:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am starting a GA review of this article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review discussion[edit]

Per request at my talk page, we'll take this at a slower pace. North8000 (talk) 15:56, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed a few punctuation errors that were within a quote, by changing two colons to semi-colons. I'm assuming that this was an editing error rather than how they were in the quote. The reference iis off line so I was unable to check it. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:11, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What a thorough, expert, well written. informative article! I think that it is 99% ready to pass GA right now. The "1%" is in an area where I'm particularly tough which is empathy for the reader. My thought is that the reader should be able to understand the meaning of the sentence without going to other articles. There are just one, maybe two places where I think that this is not the case. The one is where I think a few words on what "Dumas" is is necessary to understand what the sentence means. I might fix that myself. There might be one more; I'll have a final look. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. That was the only one that I found and you resolved it. North8000 (talk) 22:37, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria final checklist[edit]

Well-written

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Factually accurate and verifiable

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 16:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 16:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

Meets this criteria. Article is stable. North8000 (talk) 22:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by images

Meets this criteria. Has 6 images. None are non-free so no article-specific use rationales are required. North8000 (talk) 22:35, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Result[edit]

Congratulations, this has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. What a thorough and well done article! Nice work! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]