Talk:Chemical Bank/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TeacherA (talk) 23:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

This is a fundamentally good article. I am inclined to pass it in its current form but do have suggestions to improve it.

A little more history is needed. How big was the bank. Market share or at least assets held. Areas that it was strong. Countries that it expanded into. In essence, a little more description about the company. There is also no mention of the big wigs of the company, like the CEO. Of course, not a full list of every CEO in history, but a little info.

As far as all the other criteria, it passes by a long shot. Just a little work in being broad in its coverage will make it unquestionably good. Good luck. TeacherA (talk) 23:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• I have tried addressing some of these items - could probably do even more over time. Appreciate the feedback. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 06:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

TeacherA (talk) 23:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)