Talk:Old National Library Building/GA1

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

Reviewer: Acalycine (talk · contribs) 04:22, 12 April 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:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Comment: Interesting article on a historical building, well structured with a generous amount of images, definitely a good article. Acalycine ( talk / contribs ) 04:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 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:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Comment: Interesting article on a historical building, well structured with a generous amount of images, definitely a good article. Acalycine ( talk / contribs ) 04:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Comment: Interesting article on a historical building, well structured with a generous amount of images, definitely a good article. Acalycine ( talk / contribs ) 04:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)