Talk:Ocean Village Marina, Gibraltar/GA1

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 20:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

This article looks like it is definitely within reach of Good Article status, if not already. I'll be completing my review within the next few days. -- Caponer (talk) 20:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * The article is indeed clearly written, and utilizes correct spelling and grammar. The lead section also incorporates information from each of the section and summarizes the body's content appropriately.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * In compliance with all the above mandates/guidelines.
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * The article's content is sourced utilizes internal citations for references that meet Wikipedia guidelines. There does not seem to be any OR, and the article passes a copy-vio check.
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * The sources check out, and meet Wikipedia guidelines for GA status.
 * C. No original research:
 * No OR.
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * The article stays within the scope of the topic, and touches about the major aspects of the Ocean Village Marine without getting into the weeds.
 * B. Focused:
 * Check!
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Has a NPOV--no problem here.
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * The article is as stable as one can be.
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * All the images included have been released into the public domain by their creators. The latter two are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. One question: should "File:Ocean Village berths with rock behind.jpg" be licensed with like CCA-SA 3.0 or something similar? I notice it's released into the PD, but not under a specific license.
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * Images are indeed relevant.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Overall comments Dr. Blofeld, outstanding job! This article meets all the GA criteria, but I had two comments/questions before its final passage. Once these have been addressed, I think the article will be good to go! -- Caponer (talk) 01:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * File:Ocean Village berths with rock behind.jpg has been released into the public domain, but it is not licensed with a specific license. Is this a deal breaker for GA? I noticed it was utilized as an image for DYK, but not sure if this is alright for GA. I'm sure it is, but I wanted to address my uncertainty.
 * As a non-Gibraltarian, I'm unfamiliar with the description in the location section. A corresponding map would be helpful for users to place the marina's location within Gibraltar. Would it be possible to include the locator map utilized in the article for Gibraltar International Airport? File:Gibraltar map-en-edit2.svg is a featured image, so it would be well suited for inclusion, although I'd leave it up to you to decide its placement location--perhaps in the info box.

Thanks for the review Caponer! I believe "released into the public domain" is an acceptable license on here. Added map!♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:52, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright Dr. Blofeld! It looks like we have a Good Article here! Thank you for your timely response, and for the addition of the map. As always, it's been a privilege working with you throughout this process, and I commend you again for your patience. -- Caponer (talk) 10:00, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Cheers and likewise. I made a map with a big label so it can be seen from thumbnail.♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:02, 11 March 2014 (UTC)