Jump to content

Talk:Corn Street, Bristol

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 01:24, 31 January 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Bristol}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Corn Street, Bristol/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WPCW (talk · contribs) 18:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Review

[edit]

The review of the article was at the time and date displayed at the end of the review. The review complied with the Wikipedia good article criteria,

Well written

Verifiable with no original research

Broad in coverage

Neutral

Stable

Illustrated

Well written

A well written and accessible article containing no grammar or spelling mistakes. It fully complies with the manual of style.

Verifiable with no original research

The reference list contains an assortment of sources that are both reliable and verifiable. The layout of references and inline citations follow the manual of style. A check with anti-plagiarism software identifies no evidence of plagiarism.

Broad in coverage

The article covers one major street in Bristol. The article includes all aspects of the street’s history, buildings and people associated with it, so it is sufficiently broad in coverage for the average reader.

Neutral

The article is written in a factual and impartial tone.

Stable

The article is produced predominantly by a single author, without any evidence of any criticisms or editing wars.

Illustrated

The illustrations in the article are suitable and have acceptable captions. Each of the illustrations has been accessed and have no apparent copyright issues,

Summary

This review is short as the article clearly meets the good article criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPCW (talkcontribs) 19:55, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]