Talk:Clare Stevenson/GA1

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

Hi there, I am happy to tell you that this article has passed GA without the need for any further improvement. Listed below is information on how the article fared against the good article criteria, with suggestions for future development. These are not required to achieve GA standard, but they might help in future A-class or FAC review process.
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Prose is excellent, 9/10.


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * "Although keen to serve the war effort in some capacity, she demurred due to the administrative and social obstacles she foresaw." - which were?
 * Heh, took a bit of digging just to get that, as my first sources simply said she didn't want to do it initially, without any further explanation - but will add more if I find it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * It is stable.
 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:

Thankyou and congratulations, an excellent addition to Wikipedia:Good Articles. All the best.--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)