Talk:Jack Coggins/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * Reasonably well written, I did have to clean up several spelling mistakes. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * all links, live
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * ok
 * c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * 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):
 * tagged, witth fair use rationales
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, this passes muster as a GA - the prose could be improved in places. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * tagged, witth fair use rationales
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, this passes muster as a GA - the prose could be improved in places. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, this passes muster as a GA - the prose could be improved in places. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)