Talk:Blakumen/GA1

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

Reviewer: Onel5969 (talk · contribs) 16:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Onel5969 review

 * Overview: The article is generally well-written, with good organization. Good prose, no spelling or grammatical errors, no copyvios.
 * Writing: The article is generally well-written, with good organization. The lead is short, and might be lengthened, but the article itself is short, and the lead is a brief summary of the entire article.
 * References: Article is well-cited with independent, reliable sources.
 * Scope: The article is comprehensive in the coverage of its very narrow subject.
 * NPOV: The article does a good job of presenting the opposing views of different scholars
 * Edit Wars: currently, except for a brief edit war from a single editor who was erroneously questioning sources since they were unavailable on-line (which is NOT a valid contention), the article's edit history is stable.
 * Images: The two images add greatly to the article, and both have no copyright issues.


 * Pass: On the whole, I would support this article for GA status. Onel5969 (talk) 16:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

This isn't really much of anything in the way of a review, so I'm placing this back in the queue. Wizardman 00:04, 13 September 2014 (UTC)