Talk:Albert Stanley, 1st Baron Ashfield/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: S Masters (talk) 13:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Article is well written and complies to WP:MoS.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Article appears to be stable.

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments: Overall, the article has a good chance of becoming a Good Article, however, minor grammar issues (particularly punctuation), prevent it from becoming one. You can see that I started to do a bit of the copy edit. I initially thought there were just a few, but it was more than I expected and I had to stop. I suggest getting a good copy editor to give this a once over to bring it up to standards. I will allow up to seven days for this to be completed before making any further decision.

I've checked through the article again and fixed a few extraneous commas and the like, and made some other minor copy edits. Let me know if there's anything else you can see. --DavidCane (talk) 00:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Final summary: Thank you for all the hard work done on this. I am now satisfied that it meets all the requirements for a Good Article, and I am happy to pass it as such. -- S Masters (talk) 05:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)