Talk:Battle of the Defile/GA1

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 11:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

: The article is well-written, aside from a few minor grammatical errors which I corrected, and decently wikified, with an informative introduction. There are no problems with list formats, as no list other than the references has been included in the article. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * (a) ;  and
 * (b).

: Article cites four reputable, published sources, frequently and thoroughly in all of its body sections. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * (a) ;
 * (b) ; and
 * (c).

: This battle-article covers all main aspects of its subject; the background, the battle itself, and the aftermath. I did not see any trivia included in any of these sections; all the information presented is noteworthy. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC) (a) ; and
 * (b).

. No biased content displayed in this article. I'd even go so far as to say it portrays superb neutrality on this subject. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC) . Roughly 85% of the changes made to this article at the time of this evaluation (including the creation of the article), have been made by one editor, over a course of roughly 1 and 3/4 years, and no evidence has been given that any of the remaining 15% of contributions have been made in conflict with the main editor's or each other's contributions. In short, it doesn't look like anyone's been edit-warring on this article. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 06:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC) : There is only one image currently used in the article, and it is suitably captioned for its use in the article's infobox. The image is created by the primary contributor to the article; issued under a valid free license. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

Article is GA-worthy. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)