Talk:McGill University/GA1
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. So I will be assessing the article.Pyrotec (talk)16:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Reassessment
[edit]An authoritative, well-written, well-illustrated, well-referenced article, that is compliant with the requirements of Wikipedia:Good article criteria. I recommend that it should retain it's GA-status.
Interestingly it has some 176 in-line citations and one {citation needed} flag: efforts should be made to address this 'defect' immediately.Pyrotec (talk) 16:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)