Talk:Eileen Niedfield/GA3: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Adding nominator information
requesting digital sources
Line 24: Line 24:
| picsrelevant = <!-- images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions -->
| picsrelevant = <!-- images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions -->
}}
}}
===General comments===
*Could you provide a digital copy of source #2 please? (I might end up wanting digital copies of all online sources you provided, so be prepared).

Revision as of 03:22, 22 April 2024

GA Review

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

Nominator: Fortunaa (talk · contribs) 12:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: HistoryTheorist (talk · contribs) 02:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I look forward to reviewing this article. Depending on my schedule, a full review might not come until next weekend, but I hope to review this article in bits and pieces over the week. This review will focus on making original research issues and the other MOS details Airship mentioned, as I trust (but will verify) that the other aspects they checked remain up to GA standards. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 02:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

General comments

  • Could you provide a digital copy of source #2 please? (I might end up wanting digital copies of all online sources you provided, so be prepared).