Talk:Ministry of Justice (Soviet Union)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I have taken on reviewing the article and will post a review shortly. Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

GA Assessment
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 21:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 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:
 * The article needs to be expanded and corrected for it to be considered for GA. While this article is a good start, and it is very important, it is not GA material.  However, I am upgrading this article to B status.  Also, more pictures relating to the topic need to be added.
 * 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:
 * The article needs to be expanded and corrected for it to be considered for GA. While this article is a good start, and it is very important, it is not GA material.  However, I am upgrading this article to B status.  Also, more pictures relating to the topic need to be added.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article needs to be expanded and corrected for it to be considered for GA. While this article is a good start, and it is very important, it is not GA material.  However, I am upgrading this article to B status.  Also, more pictures relating to the topic need to be added.

Reassessment Potential
After speaking with the creator and principal editor of this article, I have decided to place this article's GA nomination on hold. Many of the mistakes I cited were not actual mistakes but information I was not familiar with. After the creator/editor of this page has made the appropriate changes, I will reassess this article. Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!


 * I added two images.
 * I havn't found a method to link a translated version of the Russian text, but you could probably translate the text at Google translate.
 * All the Russian refs have a English translation of the title.
 * Question, those this mean that there are no serious grammer mistakes with the article?
 * --TIAYN (talk) 08:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I really like all the revisions you have made to the article. There are no serious grammar errors, so the article looks ready for a reassessment. Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Final Assessment
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * All errors have been fixed.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * Article meets MoS criteria
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * Article reflects the sources and adds nothing new
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * I fely that the topic of the article was conveyed well.
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Article appears neutral - following the sources closely, and not loading the article with undue praise or criticism
 * 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:
 * The new pictures are a great addition to the article.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article's revisions came out very well. This article meets GA standards and with a little more work could be a candidate for "A" status.
 * Thanks! :) --TIAYN (talk) 18:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article's revisions came out very well. This article meets GA standards and with a little more work could be a candidate for "A" status.
 * Thanks! :) --TIAYN (talk) 18:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear TIAYN, as a major contributor to the article, you don't have the right to assess this article. This article is effectively B class and in no way a GA. I am reassessing it as a B class R.Sivanesh ✆ 17:38, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't pass the article, the reviewer did..... He just forgot to sign his/her own statement. --TIAYN (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2011 (UTC)