Talk:Petition of Right/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Harej (talk · contribs) 23:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I will be the reviewer for this article. hare j 23:05, 13 October 2011 (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): No complaints to register.

   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Total compliance.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): Yes

   b (citations to reliable sources): Yes

   c (OR): No original research.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): Covers everything about the Petition of Right from soup to nuts.

   b (focused): Each of the aspects are described in full detail.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: Yes.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.: No edit wars, nor do I anticipate any cropping up unless there's a resurgence in Stuart loyalists, but I am surprised at the amount of vandalism this article gets. This, however, is not an issue, for vandalism is promptly reverted.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): Yes

   b (appropriate use with suitable captions): Yes

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Article approved with no revision required. hare j 23:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)