Talk:Sir John Fowler, 1st Baronet/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 16:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Overall summary
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
An informative, well-referenced, well-illustrated article.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- Well referenced; but the three ICE web links (refs 8, 9 and 10) seem to have moved and now need updating.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Yes. In checking some of the claims using additional references not used in the article, I found various well-known railway engineers who had trained under Fowler. There is no section on prodigies - it might be worth adding one.
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Well illustrated.
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Well illustrated.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing a well research article on a railway/engineering topic. Pyrotec (talk) 20:45, 26 June 2010 (UTC)