Talk:Christopher Greenup/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] GA Review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch

And I guess I'll take this one too! I don't know if I'll get through both reviews by tonight, but if not, I'll have this one finished by tomorrow morning at the latest. Dana boomer (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Everything looks great with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Nice work! Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 02:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)