GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will ( talk · contribs) 18:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
With a few minor grammatical fixes, the article complies with MoS guidelines on structure, layout, flow and grammar. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The article contains a plentiful bibliography of reputable third-party sources, and makes good use of them. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The article looks like it provides a well-rounded coverage of the available encyclopedic information for the topic. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:10, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
THe article maintains a neutral tone all throughout. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:08, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The most immediate revisions in the article's history show that it has not been subjected to any edit warring for at least three and a half years. "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" ( talk) 18:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
The sole image illustrating the article at present is compliant with rules on licensing and usage. "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" ( talk) 18:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
After a thorough reading of the article, and some minor fixes, I think it's ready to enter the realm of GA status. Further illustration is suggestible if/when achievable, but the article is of good enough quality that it need not be held back in wait of this. :) If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will ( talk · contribs) 18:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
With a few minor grammatical fixes, the article complies with MoS guidelines on structure, layout, flow and grammar. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The article contains a plentiful bibliography of reputable third-party sources, and makes good use of them. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The article looks like it provides a well-rounded coverage of the available encyclopedic information for the topic. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:10, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
THe article maintains a neutral tone all throughout. If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:08, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
The most immediate revisions in the article's history show that it has not been subjected to any edit warring for at least three and a half years. "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" ( talk) 18:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
The sole image illustrating the article at present is compliant with rules on licensing and usage. "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" ( talk) 18:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
After a thorough reading of the article, and some minor fixes, I think it's ready to enter the realm of GA status. Further illustration is suggestible if/when achievable, but the article is of good enough quality that it need not be held back in wait of this. :) If I had to guess... ( talk) 02:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)