Talk:U.S. Route 161/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 15:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Looks good

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   No issues here

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   All fine.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Rarely an issue with this type of article

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Unless you're edit-warring with yourself, this has to be stable

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):

   Looks good.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   No issues with the article that preclude GA status. Imzadi 1979 → 16:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)