GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Tim riley ( talk · contribs) 13:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC) Will review. Am starting first read-through today. More soonest. Tim riley ( talk) 13:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I have only three comments before observing the formalities. They are minor drafting points and do not affect the decision to promote the article.
You might add some alt text to the images; it isn't compulsory for GA, but is good practice.
This article, in my opinion, clearly meets all the GA criteria (and looks to me like an FA in waiting). An interesting and informative piece, well balanced, neutral and readable.
If you care to deal with the above minor points before I cut the ribbon, all the better. Otherwise I will proceed regardless. Tim riley ( talk) 19:22, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A fine article. It looks to me to be FAC material with very little extra work.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Tim riley ( talk · contribs) 13:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC) Will review. Am starting first read-through today. More soonest. Tim riley ( talk) 13:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
I have only three comments before observing the formalities. They are minor drafting points and do not affect the decision to promote the article.
You might add some alt text to the images; it isn't compulsory for GA, but is good practice.
This article, in my opinion, clearly meets all the GA criteria (and looks to me like an FA in waiting). An interesting and informative piece, well balanced, neutral and readable.
If you care to deal with the above minor points before I cut the ribbon, all the better. Otherwise I will proceed regardless. Tim riley ( talk) 19:22, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A fine article. It looks to me to be FAC material with very little extra work.