Talk:Heinkel He 111/GA1

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

1. It is Well-written
 * (a) The article is well written and flows well, there are no sections which don't make sense. There are only a few spelling mistakes.
 * (b) It complies with the manual of style

2. It is Factually accurate and verifiable
 * (a) References are properly layed out and all sources of information are referenced
 * (b) All quotations and stats are referenced from sources which appear reliable due to wide use of them. However the popular culture section is missing a reference and needs atleast one as this is information which could be challenged See Good article criteria
 * (c) No original research

3. It is very Broad in its coverage
 * (a) It contains a lot of relevant information and addresses all aspects of the topic, it is very well detailed
 * (b) It doesn't stray from the focused topic and all information is relevant to the Heinkel He 111

4. Written in a Neutral POV
 * (a) The article is written in a neutral and doesn't show biased opinions

5. It is Stable with no ongoing edit wars
 * (a) This page does not change significantly on a daily basis and remains stable. There are also no ongoing edit wars is the history section or on the talk page

6. It is Illustrated by images if possible
 * (a) The images are all tagged correctly with their copyright status
 * (b) The images are very relevant to the page and the captions are good with more detail given once clicking on the picture

Overall this article is very good. It is very detailed and a lot of work has clearly gone into it. The article contains well referenced quotes, statistics and lists such as list of operators. There are only a few minor problems however none of which are significant enough to stopping this from becoming a good article. For improvements, the popular culture section needs atleast one reference to be sure it isn't challenged. There are plenty of images which are all tagged correctly with their copyright status and are all relevant. This article without a shadow of a doubt makes the Good article criteria and I believe it could even go as far as featured article.

Ajpralston1 (talk) 21:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Fact tag
This is indeed a request that assertions in the lede, unsourced and not clearly born out by the subsequent text, be supported or removed. Please do not remove such tags without acknowledging such requests. Thanks.Redheylin (talk) 01:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not an assertion. In case you had not noticed, it is sourced. Perhaps a proper read of the article lead, and the development of the He 111 is required. Dapi89 (talk) 18:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)