Talk:2012 Paris–Nice/GA1

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

Reviewer: Disc Wheel (talk · contribs) 00:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Will get to this in a few hours or so. Disc Wheel ( Talk  +  Tontributions )  00:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

This was well written, references are solid, and images check out. Great work. Pass. Disc Wheel ( Talk  +  Tontributions )  03:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)