Talk:Frederick Scherger/GA1

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

Reviewer: Eurocopter (talk) 20:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

I have read the article and I must say it is an interesting and well-documented article. It uses a clean prose which makes the article accessible and easy to read. My quick pass is also a result of the Milhist A-class review passed few days ago. Keep up the good work! --Eurocopter (talk) 20:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)