Talk:106th Cavalry Regiment/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll get to this sometime in the next week. BTW, you might as well start looking up the connection of 1-106 Avn to the regiment as well as the existence of E/106 Cav for most of the 80s and 90s.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Failed as non-responsive.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail: