Talk:Angus Paton/GA1

GA Review

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

Starting GAR.Pyrotec (talk) 19:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

GAR

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

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:

   C. No original research:

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:

   Article has been in existence for ten days, none so far.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   A reasonable article, that includes a good number of in-line citations; but based essentially two main verifiable sources.

Congratulations, I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 20:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)