Talk:SMS Monarch/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 07:57, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written:

After a few minor grammatical corrections, mostly in punctuation, I feel that the prose of the article, as well as its general layout, complies with guidelines satisfactorily. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article makes frequent citations to several reliable, third-party sources. Nothing in the content resembles original research. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article appears to cover all aspects of the topic for which reliable information could be located. All information on the topic appears encyclopedically relevant. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

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

In my review of the content, I did not detect any bias towards or against the subject. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Due to its recent inclusion in Wikipedia, the immediately seen revisions in the article's history log go back to its creation, and none indicate that any edit warring has taken place on this article. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

The three images used in the article are public domain, so there is no copyright issue involved. They are well-captioned and serve important informative purposes in the article. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

After carefully reading the article over, and making minor adjustments, I feel that it is ready for inclusion amongst the War and military GAs. Congratulations! Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]