Talk:Battle of Frenchman's Creek/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gatoclass (talk) 08:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
There are a couple of references to "James" but the reference isn't included in the bibliography. Gatoclass (talk) 06:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody else has now supplied the missing reference, so the article can now be passed. Gatoclass (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Straightforward and accessible account, presented logically and which appears to cover all major aspects. Gatoclass (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pass/Fail: