Talk:Craigmillar Castle/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Initial review
A good article, the only "problem" so far is a missing reference for Lindsay.Pyrotec (talk) 19:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Maurice Lindsay now added to the bibliography, thanks for spotting. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
GAR
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- A good read
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Congratulations. You now have GA.Pyrotec (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)