Talk:Battle of Rowton Heath/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SilkTork *^YES! 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look over the next few days and then start to make some comments. SilkTork *^YES! 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

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:

Pause

I'm going to have limited internet access over the weekend as I'm going to France visiting relatives. I'll be back on March 3rd, and I'll finish dealing with this review then. SilkTork *^YES! 18:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry for delay. I'll be finishing this off shortly. SilkTork *^YES! 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

  If you're busy, I'm sure someone else can take over in short order, that's no big deal. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Pass

A useful article which summarises the main events of the day and puts them in context. It follows the sources I was able to check, and appears to be uncontroversial and neutral. I did some minor tidying up - the article was essentially sound and no need for any further work to meet GA criteria. SilkTork *^YES! 17:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)