Talk:Malawi/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * I fixed a few typos for you.
 * 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.:
 * A spate of recent vandalism, but it looks like there are no legitimate content disputes.
 * 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):
 * Image:Malawi_coa.png tagging is unclear.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Please look into the image above, but the issue is neither confined nor unique to this article, and it stands as a GA even with the coat of arms removed. Pass, however, as an excellent, well-referenced example of summary style. Jclemens (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Please look into the image above, but the issue is neither confined nor unique to this article, and it stands as a GA even with the coat of arms removed. Pass, however, as an excellent, well-referenced example of summary style. Jclemens (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thank you for the review and the quick pass. I'll take a look at the image caption and see if I can find something better. Thanks again! Dana boomer (talk) 22:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)