Talk:Amster Yard/GA1

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 07:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

This looks like another excellent article by Epicgenius. I enjoyed undertaking my last review and will attend to this shortly. simongraham (talk) 07:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


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

The article is clearly written and covers an interesting topic. It is stable, 91.7% of authorship is one user, Epicgenius. It is currently ranked a C class article.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The article complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice. I find no obvious grammar or spelling issues.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Earwig's Copyvio Detector finds no copy write violations and all citations seem to be reliable.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The article covers the main aspects of the topic.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * The article has a neutral point of view.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * All images are tagged with Creative Commons licenses.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Assessment
Congratulations. This article meets the criteria to be a Good Article.
 * Pass  simongraham (talk) 07:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)