Talk:George E. Crothers/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tomcat7 (talk · contribs) 17:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Ref 20 is dead.--Tomcat (7) 17:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've replaced the above dead link with two new sources (currently footnotes #20 and #21). Do you see anything else that needs fixing?  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)