Talk:Francisco Coimbre/Archive 1

GA Review
I'm reviewing the article now, and I'll be posting my review shortly. Noble Story (talk) 01:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's my review for the article


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * The article is not up to GA-quality in this respect. There are numerous mistakes in grammar and prose (most notably using "on" instead of "in"). It seems to be written by a non-native English speaker (no offense to the editors, but I'm being blunt). The writing has to be improved before it can be promoted.
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * This is another aspect in which the article fails. There are many statements that are unsourced.
 * 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:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * No edit wars, etc:


 * 1) Overall: Pass or Fail:
 * Usually I put an article on hold and try to help the nominator in correcting the article, but I think the edits are too large here to be done in a short amount of time. Try going back and correcting the prose, and adding citations to statements that need them.

Noble Story (talk) 10:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)