Talk:Marktkirche Unser Lieben Frauen/GA1

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 12:58, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 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:


 * Dabsolver check: ok
 * Checklinks check: ok
 * Comparing with the German article, there is nearly zero information about its architecture.
 * There should be neither cn tags nor unreferenced text.
 * So I give you 14 days to expand this article. If you need help, please ask (I contacted the main editor; if he doesn't answer, and if you don't find more information in the public internet, then we must live with it).
 * Edit I just received a message by PumpkinSky; I will close this at the request of nominator.-- ♫GoP♫ T C N 13:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)