Talk:Reinhard Scheer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Reinhard Scheer has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Germany (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Biography / Military (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group (marked as Mid-importance).
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Reinhard Scheer/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

On first reading, before I get to the formal evaluation, this looks like an excellent article that I will have no trouble approving. There is only one oversight that should be corrected: Several citations refer to "Tarrant," but it is not identified in the bibliography. Reviewer: PKKloeppel (talk) 22:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that, I added the full reference to the bibliography. Parsecboy (talk) 02:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Formal evaluation: The article is

1. Well-written:
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct: yes
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections and layout: yes
2. Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information: yes
(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations: yes
(c) it contains no original research: yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic: yes
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail: yes
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias: yes
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: yes
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: yes

Summary: The article meets all the criteria for a Wikipedia Good Article. Passed. PKKloeppel (talk) 14:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)