Talk:Harry Strom/GA1

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

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 August 10, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Written in a clear and understandable manner for the reader.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited to WP:RS/WP:V sources throughout. I made some very minor copyedits and layout edits only. I split up the References subsection into Notes/References, per WP:LAYOUT, but that was pretty much all, everything else was fine.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Article is thorough, covering many aspects of the individual's life and laid out in an organized format and flow.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Article appears to be written in a neutrally worded manner.
 * 5. Article stability? Pass
 * 6. Images?: One image used (in infobox) detailed fair use rationale provided on image page, no problems here.

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.— Cirt (talk) 01:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)