Talk:SM U-67/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

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 20:42, 27 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 good with this article, so I am going to pass it to GA status. The only comment I have is that the lead is probably a little long for an article of this length - two paragraphs are more than sufficient for an article of under 15 kb. However, this is not a huge deal, and not something that will hold up a GA pass. Nice work on another Good Article! Dana boomer (talk) 21:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]