Talk:Astley, Greater Manchester/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC) (Cake and wine tomorrow). Pyrotec (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Overall summary[edit]
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A comprehensive well-referenced, well-illustrated article.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- Well referenced.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Well referenced, but two web-links to "local authorities" appeared to be broken at the time of ther review.
- 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:
- Well illustrated.
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Well illustrated. Most of the pictures seem to have been taken by the nominator.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
A fine article and pictures. I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on your work.
After a bit of well-deserved cake, there are a couple of web-references that appear to need fixing: Ref 76 (Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue, http://www.manchesterfire.gov.uk/my-area/wigan.aspx, retrieved 2010-05-24) and ref 33 (Greater Manchester County Record Office, 2009-08-15, http://www.gmcro.co.uk/guides/gazette/gazframe.htm, retrieved 2009-08-15). Pyrotec (talk) 19:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)