Talk:Chamba, Himachal Pradesh/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Will be reviewing soon. Pyrotec (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A comprehensive but eminently readable and informative article.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Well referenced.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Well referenced.

   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:

   Well illustrated.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Well illustrated.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

This article is well on its way towards WP:FAC. I'm awarding it GA-status. Congratulations on bringing this article up to the required qaulity standards. Pyrotec (talk) 12:16, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou Pyrotec. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)