Talk:Latakia/GA1

GA Review

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

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments

On a quick read through, this article appears to be at or about GA-level. I'll therefore continue the review, going through the article section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last. Pyrotec (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A wide-ranging, well-illustrated article, of GA-standard.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   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:

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

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

A good Good-Article. Congratulations on the quality of the article. Its now a GA.Pyrotec (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I'll tell Yazan and Spencer the good news. Thanks for the review! --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)