Talk:Military career of L. Ron Hubbard/GA1

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

Starting GA review. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC) Quick fail criteria assessment No problems with quick fail criteria. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:16, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * all check out as far as is possible to ascertain
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * 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:
 * An excellent article, maintaining NPOV between official sources and Scientology sources. I have no hesitation in passing this as a GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * An excellent article, maintaining NPOV between official sources and Scientology sources. I have no hesitation in passing this as a GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * An excellent article, maintaining NPOV between official sources and Scientology sources. I have no hesitation in passing this as a GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * An excellent article, maintaining NPOV between official sources and Scientology sources. I have no hesitation in passing this as a GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)