Talk:Lund University/GA1

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


 * 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:

Ok. Off the bat, this meets the quick fail criteria, as there are several tags on the article (the section expansion and lack of sources), which is a big no-no for Good Article status. Second, you do lack information in important places. I understand if sources may lack, but history of a current-day university doesn't end at the 1820s. There are places this should be worked on. Also, not a complaint, I love the illustration of this article. When this is fully complete, they'll be a great help! Sorry to do this, but I have to fail this until the major issues are solved, and 7 days won't be enough in my opinion. Send me a message if you have a problem! Mitch 32(The Password is... See here!) 16:39, 21 September 2009 (UTC)