Talk:Battle of Frenchman's Creek/GA1

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

Reviewer: Gatoclass (talk) 08:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 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):
 * There are a couple of references to "James" but the reference isn't included in the bibliography. Gatoclass (talk) 06:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Somebody else has now supplied the missing reference, so the article can now be passed. Gatoclass (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 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: Straightforward and accessible account, presented logically and which appears to cover all major aspects. Gatoclass (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 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: Straightforward and accessible account, presented logically and which appears to cover all major aspects. Gatoclass (talk) 14:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: