Talk:Francis Gleeson (priest)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Canadian Paul (talk · contribs) 20:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article in the near future, most on Monday, but I will be mindful of the nominator's comment that they are only able to address concerns on weekends. Canadian Paul 20:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

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.:

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:

Definitely meets the Good Article criteria, as there were only one or two minor issues that I fixed up myself. This is the first GA I've ever passed without putting on hold first, so congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Canadian Paul 16:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)