Talk:Ali Iskandar of Johor/GA1

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 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:
 * Pass GA.
 * 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:
 * Pass GA.
 * Pass GA.

There are no images, which is suggested for GA. Try to see if images are available. Since the Sultan is from the 1800's, it is understandable if none are available.

The first paragraph is confusing because Tengku Ali's name is used but it isn't clear who he is without extensive reading.

The style of writing is good but is rather lengthy and not typical of Wikipedia. However, this is not to say it is unacceptable. The few numbers of blue links is actually nice as many articles are overlinked.

Keep on trying to improve this! TeacherA (talk) 23:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)