Talk:Kingdom of East Anglia/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk · contribs) 08:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 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 (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments

 * No dab links needing attention
 * external link ok
 * according to Richard Hoggett according to Pauline Stafford - who ? - according to historian or similar
 * sorted Hel-hama (talk) 21:03, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * mixing of styles there is 7th century and later mid-seventh century - suggest its written in full every time but your choice which one you choose
 * sorted Hel-hama (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Is there nothing known about their trading/commerce
 * Kirby, D. P. (2000). Hunter Blair, Peter; Keynes, Simon (2003). need there ISBNs checked showing wrong on the tool
 * sorted Hel-hama (talk) 09:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Brown, Michelle P.; Farr, Carol Ann (2001) needs the city of publication added
 * sorted Hel-hama (talk) 08:49, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hoggett, Richard (2010) is the only one to have UK added
 * sorted Hel-hama (talk) 08:42, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

On hold
Well done some small points for an article this size. I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Jim Sweeney (talk) 03:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)