Talk:2001 Avjet Gulfstream III crash/GA2

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


 * Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 14:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments
The problems with lack of in-line citations in some sections, which led to GA-status being withdrawn at WP:GAR appear to have been addressed. I will now carry out a more detailed review of this article. Pyrotec (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 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:

Congratulations on the quality of the article. I'm awarding GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 21:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the GA renewal and your effort. Crum375 (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)