Talk:William Phips/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 07:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:15, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Put a space between pages in cites 78, 96 Done Magic♪piano 13:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

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:

   Link ship's captain, Increase Mather, bullion, doubloon, shipyard. Were Rose of Algiers and James and Mary royal ships? If so, redlink them.

   First reference to Increase Mather is already linked (2nd para of military expeditions); other terms linked. James and Mary was apparently purchased by the investors; no source I've seen describes Rose of Algiers as a Royal Navy ship. Magic♪piano 13:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

   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:

Let me know if more is needed. Magic♪piano 13:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC)