Talk:Bleeding Through/GA2

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Jezhotwells

Checking against GA criteria

edit
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):  
    b (MoS):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):  
    • Two dead links and two redirects found using this tool. Ref #7 does not support the statement; other live references are OK.
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its scope.
    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.:  
  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:  
    OK, I am happy to confirm this article's GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply