Talk:Wulfhelm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Somerset (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography (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.
 

GA Review[edit]

Toolbox

See WP:DEADREF
for dead URLs

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

Reviewer: Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) 21:15, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


1. Well written?: Very well-written. Clear, concise prose.
2. Factually accurate?: Sources look good. I have no problems here.
3. Broad in coverage?: Well, it's a bit short, but given when he lived, I could believe this contains most of the relevant, known information about him. I may get criticised for this, but I'm giving this a pass.
4. Neutral point of view?: No issues
5. Article stability?: No issues
6. Images?: This is one of those "where possible" requirements; illustrations for people from this period can be a bit difficult, and sometimes impossible, so I don't see this as a blocker.

While the shortness of the article might draw comment, I do consider this a well-written, well-researched piece, deserving GA status.  Pass