Talk:SS Montanan/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Hi! I will be doing the GA review for this article, and should have the full review up within a couple of hours. Dana boomer (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
In the very last sentence of the article, you talk about the fate of the West Bridge. While this is an interesting tidbit of information, I'm not totally sure that it's needed in an article on the Montanan, and I'm also not sure that it's a good ending sentence for an article. If you really want to keep this bit of information (and, like I said, it's interesting, so I'm not horribly against it), would there be any way to re-word this section so that the West Bridge isn't the very last thing talked about in the article, since the article isn't about that ship?
Good point. I converted the sentence into a note. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Please add authors for the short refs of the West Alsek and West Bridge DANFS cites.
Done. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Overall, a very nice article. I'm putting it on hold to allow time for a few minor tweaks. Let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice! Thanks for the quick response; I'm going to pass the article now. Dana boomer (talk) 16:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]