Talk:Gwen Cooper/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 07:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I will review this article. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 07:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of March 18, 2012, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: It's well written alright, but there's tense shifting a bit. I copyedited most of them, but this is something definitely for a peer review, where you should enlist help of more copyeditor type people thingies to do stuff and things.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Covers major aspects of subject matter.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Presents material in appropriate matter-of-fact manner.
 * 5. Article stability? Upon inspection of article talk page and article edit history, no major problems here.
 * 6. Images?: Free use images used, additionally one fair use image, appropriate information on the fair use image's description page.

Closing comments: Suggestion = go for peer review, and get copyeditors to help you there. Try WP:GOCE, and post to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects for more copyeditors. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Very happy with the outcome! Thanks for your patience and help in this. I'll definitely look into another Peer Review and putting this by the Guild of CopyEditors later. Eshlare (talk) 11:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)