Talk:Bernard Foing/GA1

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

Reviewer: Adavis444 (talk) 09:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC) From the Good article criteria, GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

As Adavis444 has not implemented a review, despite a reminder on their talk page, i am taking over this review. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: No dabs found.

Linkrot: No dead links found. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:33, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The lead does not adequately summarise the article. Please read WP:LEAD.
 * Prose is reasonable.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * References appear OK, but few mention him in more than passing as an author.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * As a biography, this is not at all broad in its coverage, the article is primarily about projects that Foing has been involved in. As a BLP it is still stub class.
 * 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):
 * Non free images must not be used in the infobox or lead for BLPs, as per WP:Fair use
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am failing this nomination at the present time as I feel that the article is not sufficiently broad in its coverage. The points about the lead and the non-free image also need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am failing this nomination at the present time as I feel that the article is not sufficiently broad in its coverage. The points about the lead and the non-free image also need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)