Talk:2/48th Battalion (Australia)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk) 09:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Progression

 * Version of the article when originally reviewed: []
 * Version of the article when review was closed: []

Technical review

 * Disambiguations: None found -
 * Linkrot: None found -
 * Alt text: All images have alt text.

Criteria

 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * IMO it is well written and MOS compliant.


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * All information is cited to reliable sources and there is no original research that I can find.


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Major aspects are covered.


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * It is written from a neutral POV, is a fair representation of events and uses all major works available.


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * Although there has been considerable recent work, the article is not subject to an edit war.


 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain':
 * Images are appropriate for the article, and are tagged and captioned;
 * Images is a non-free image, but has an appropriate free-use rationale.


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * Overall this is a another good battlion history. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 11:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)