Talk:10th millennium BC/GA1

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

Reviewer: 3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk · contribs) 09:22, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Comments by 3E1I5S8B9RF7

 * Reference No. 9 should have an URL link.
 * References No. 12, 13, 21, 24, 27, 28, 30, 31 & 33 should be formatted like the others (Edwards, p. 21), with the book title in "Bibliography" section, with the others.
 * Reference No. 19 lacks an ISBN number.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 09:22, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, 3E1I5S8B9RF7. Thank you for these points which I will address. I'll let you know when I've done. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Points addressed
All points have been addressed. Citations have been added over many years and there was inconsistency which is hopefully much improved now. Thanks again. No Great Shaker (talk) 11:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Conclusion
I think the article now meets the GA criteria. I'm promoting it, accordingly.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 12:12, 8 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. The review was thorough as it highlighted the inconsistencies in sourcing and I was glad to put that right. Now that we have a standard, as such, for one of these millennia articles, it can be applied to the others. Thanks again and all the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:16, 8 June 2019 (UTC)