Talk:Uppsala Cathedral/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jionpedia (talk · contribs) 18:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Will review it in the next coming days. Regards, --Jionpedia ✉ 18:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- Great job, Blofeld. Hardly any flaws. I fixed the minor problems, though.
Final analysis
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- 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:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
Don't get it delisted! Thanks, --Jionpedia ✉ 15:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Jion, Ipigott deserves most of the credit though..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:32, 19 October 2013 (UTC)