Talk:Battle of Pell's Point/GA1

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

I don't know anything about the subject, but the article was an enjoyable read and seems to be well linked, referenced and illustrated. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 11:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA. I agree that the article was enjoyable, thrilling really, and is well written and well referenced. I did a little copy editing, giving my rationale for each edit. However, you are free to change my edits. Given that your numbers are correct (that the British had eighty vessels), this is a remarkable story. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 01:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

I never just pass an article but this one is good. I urge you to be consistent with the wikilinking and consiter WP:MoS as you go through the article. Congratulations! &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 01:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Sets the context 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.:
 * 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: