Talk:Encyclopedia of the Central Intelligence Agency/GA1

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

Reviewer: Diannaa (talk · contribs) 00:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Cirt. I will start the review tomorrow. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks very much, and feel free to take your time! :) &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:21, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
 * I have done a wee copy edit; the prose is fine.
 * B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * Sabalos is used as a source, and should therefore not be listed in Further Reading (I have fixed this).
 * 1) Sourcing:
 * A. Provides references, with in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
 * Article is sourced to high quality newspapers and periodicals. None of the sources are available online, so I was unable to check for copyright issues.
 * B. No original research:
 * Opinions expressed are those of the sources
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Main aspects are addressed:
 * Article covers the topics listed at WikiProject Books, including Background, Content summary, Publication history, Reception. Article is a bit short for a GA but covers all the main points.
 * Star-Reporter of what city? I assumed Columbia, South Carolina; please fix this if it's wrong.
 * B. Remains focused:
 * 1) Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?
 * 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:
 * Info box image is properly licensed and scaled to the correct size for non-free use.
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:


 * Just a couple of minor points, which I have already fixed. Article passes to GA. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)