Talk:Interstate 496/GA1

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Rp0211 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Rp0211 (talk · contribs) 20:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)Reply


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:  


Infobox

edit
  • No issues

Lead

edit
  • No issues

Route description

edit
  • No issues

History

edit
  • No issues

Exit list

edit
  • No issues
edit
  • No issues

References

edit
  • No issues


After thoroughly reviewing this article, I have concluded that it meets the good article criteria at this time. Congratulations and keep up the good work! Rp0211 (talk2me) 22:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)Reply