Talk:Battle of Hubbardton/GA1

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

Very nice article. Congratulations! &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:25, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): This well written; prose style makes the article interesting. b (MoS): Follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): The article is well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): The sources are reliable  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers all major aspects b (focused): Remains focused on subject
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.: Stable
 * 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:


 * Thanks!  Magic ♪piano 23:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Merge "Hubbardton Battlefield" into this article?
I believe Hubbardton Battlefield should be merged into this article. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)