Talk:Church of St Nicholas, Sapareva Banya/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for devoting your time and looking forward to your review! — Toдor Boжinov — 16:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A short, but interesting, well-referenced and well-illustrated article on a local church.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   I did a couple of minor edits to improve the grammar.

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

   Yes, however the WP:Lead is intended to both introduce the article (which it did well) and to summarise the main points of the article. I copied a pasted a few words from the Architecture section into the Lead, as it did not provide much in the way of a summary.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   Yes, but there may be a problem with reference 2, used five times, my web brower gives an error message - "The URL is not valid and cannot be loaded".

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:

I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing an interesting and well illustrated article.

Thanks for your review and lead expansion! I figure you were unable to access the ref 2 URL because part of the address is in Cyrillic. I'll WebCite all URLs in the article so that we don't lose them in the future :) Best, — Toдor Boжinov — 14:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)