Talk:Battle of Chaeronea (338 BC)/GA1

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

Reviewer: ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  01:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I shall be undertaking the review of this article against the Good Article criteria, per its nomination for Good Article status. ✽ Juniper§ Liege  (TALK)  01:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

Article meets quick-fail criteria. Main review to follow. ✽ Juniper§ Liege  (TALK)  01:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Main review

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * Well written. Identified problems addressed.
 * b (MoS):
 * Conforms to manual of style.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * Well referenced. However, the article is very dependent on the source by Cawkwell - this is the only major concern of the article. If possible, other sources should be introduced, even as supporting references. As there are a couple of other sources used in the article, it is not sufficient to fail, but the problem should be borne in mind for future improvement.
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * Citations are to third party publications.
 * c (OR):
 * No evidence of OR.
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * a (major aspects):
 * Addresses major aspect of article subject matter.
 * b (focused):
 * Remains focused. No digressions.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy:
 * No issues concerning POV evident.
 * 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):
 * Images are properly tagged and justified.
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Images are accompanied by contextual captions.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: PASS  ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  01:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: PASS  ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  01:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail: PASS  ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  01:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)