Talk:USS Bennington (PG-4)/GA1

GA Review

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

Below is my review of the article:

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I couldn't find a single sloppy sentence except this: 'the final tally of the dead was one officer and sixty-five men dead'. Not too happy with it. Please consider rewording.

   • I changed it to "the final death toll was one officer and sixty-five men" — Bellhalla (talk) 10:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

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:

The article is written brilliantly. Thanks for a nice read. Nothing else to say. - DSachan (talk) 09:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and the kind words. — Bellhalla (talk) 10:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)