Talk:Mamie Eisenhower/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Orson12345 (talk · contribs) 21:05, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

here for what they are not)

---

Good to go for to be listed as one of the GAs.

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Hello! Very well written article, sources are good and extensive, images meet the criteria, and overall just a good article. Meets all the GA rules. I’m happy to approve this article for GA status, great work!--Orson12345 (Talk • Contribs) 21:06, 8 October 2022 (UTC)