Talk:Pact of Steel/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Herald (talk · contribs) 08:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

The review will be completed in a couple of days. -The Herald the joy of the LORD my strength 08:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Criteria
 Good Article Status – Review Criteria   		A good article is—  :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

:
 * (a) ;
 * (b) ; and
 * (c).

:
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

. . :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

</ol>

Review

 * 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:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Comments and discussion

 * The article is reasonably good and is well written. I still have a slight concern on the length of it. Just a bit less than 5kb of prose for such a good pact, fells like unbelievable. A good amount of expansion is required in background and dissolution section. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 09:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ Have expanded the sections in question. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 21:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Cites are good enough but more will be appreciated, specially those of online. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 09:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ Have added three more academic sources to the article and replaced them with the online ones where I could. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 21:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * A slight excerpt from WikiSource is expected which had an influence of political fields and make this pact a notable one. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 09:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ Good call. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 21:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Cite 1 and 9 are extensively used and must be replaced by a reliable one. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 09:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * ❌ Actually, the television documentaries in question are considered reliable. They are produced by World Media Rights and written by Benjamin Schwarz, notable American historian with a B.A. and an M.A. in history from Yale University.
 * Footnotes are expected. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 09:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, could you be more detailed or specific? I don't understand what you mean by "Footnotes are expected"? Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 21:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The Herald, thank you very much for taking on the review. As I'm a night owl almost to the point of being a vampire, I just woke up and won't have time to edit the article according your points until approximately 6-8 hours later today. I will, however, make an effort to expand and improve the article then. Thanks again for taking on the review. :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 12:55, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * , I have responded and made edits according your comments. Please let me know if there is anything else. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 21:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I mean, more footnotes/notes are expected, though they are not mandatory. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 07:40, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * , sorry, but I still don't understand what you're saying! Do you mean I should include a footnotes section and add a note somewhere in the article? Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Exactly... plus, ping me not every time..-The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 15:13, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've added a footnote. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 15:55, 18 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Dissolution section's first line requires a merge with the others. A better English, I say.. -The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 16:00, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It's done, The Herald. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 16:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Result
..It's a pass here. The article meets the GA requirements and is literally a good article..-The Herald <sup style="margin-left:0.5px">the joy of the LORD <sub style="margin-left:-47.5px">my strength 08:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)