Talk:Battle of Beaufort/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sp33dyphil (talk · contribs) 12:23, 24 January 2012 (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:


 * "Battle of Beaufort, or the Battle of Port Royal Island, was" Missing commas. Fixed
 * "February 3, 1779, near" Again, missing commas; please check throughout. Fixed
 * Why's "Brigadier General" wikified but "Major General" isn't? Fixed
 * MoS calls for the inclusion of alt text. Fixed
 * No dead links (no action required)
 * No dabs (no action required)

Thanks for taking the time to review. Is there more coming?  Magic ♪piano 18:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)