Talk:Deeping Fen/GA1

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

Reviewer: Rcsprinter123 (talk · contribs) 11:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria I'll take this review. It looks as if a lot of work has gone into this article, so I expect good results.
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Perhaps a couple more images, wikilinks, less long lead but none of these detract from letting it get the status. I'm promoting.  Rcsprinter  (post)  @ 11:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Perhaps a couple more images, wikilinks, less long lead but none of these detract from letting it get the status. I'm promoting.  Rcsprinter  (post)  @ 11:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Perhaps a couple more images, wikilinks, less long lead but none of these detract from letting it get the status. I'm promoting.  Rcsprinter  (post)  @ 11:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)