Talk:Petitcodiac River/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 18:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * I find the article to be well written and organised following the Manual of Style and project guidelines.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Referenced well, references are RS, sources support the cited statements.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Through with uneccessary detail.
 * 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:
 * This article meets the criteria so I am happy to list it. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This article meets the criteria so I am happy to list it. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)