Talk:Edward Coke/GA1

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

Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

I will begin reading through this in a day or two. Sorry you had to wait a month for this.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

A very clear pass, a rare article in which nothing major needs to be addressed. This is in my opinion in exceptionally sound condition and possibly would pass as a featured article with some minor edits. It certainly appears to be of the comprehension of a featured article. This is top work Ironholds, great job.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:35, 30 August 2011 (UTC)