Talk:Jesu, meine Freude/GA1

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Gerda Arendt in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: 3family6 (talk · contribs) 15:50, 3 November 2014 (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, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    Writing is solid, and no copyvios present.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    I have only intermediate knowledge of German, but I was able to understand the German language sources enough to confirm that they do support the content in the article.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    Focused on the subject, but also provides enough historical context.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    Presented in a very neutral, encyclopedic fashion.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
    Highly stable, single-author article.
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
    The image of Johann Crüger had a small licensing tag problem (which I've found is extremely pervasive in Commons) where it was tagged for use in European countries, but not the US. I updated the tag to include the US under the public domain license. This does not greatly affect the article in any way, so it shouldn't bias this review.
  7. Overall: Well done. I couldn't find any problems with the article.--¿3family6 contribs 16:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
    Pass/Fail:  
Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 6 November 2014 (UTC)Reply