Talk:Latakia/GA1

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


 * Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments
On a quick read through, this article appears to be at or about GA-level. I'll therefore continue the review, going through the article section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last. Pyrotec (talk) 18:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

A good Good-Article. Congratulations on the quality of the article. Its now a GA.Pyrotec (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Wow, I'll tell Yazan and Spencer the good news. Thanks for the review! --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)