Talk:Petition of Right/GA1

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

Reviewer: Harej (talk · contribs) 23:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I will be the reviewer for this article. hare j 23:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): No complaints to register.
 * b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Total compliance.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Yes
 * b (citations to reliable sources): Yes
 * c (OR): No original research.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers everything about the Petition of Right from soup to nuts.
 * b (focused): Each of the aspects are described in full detail.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: Yes.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.: No edit wars, nor do I anticipate any cropping up unless there's a resurgence in Stuart loyalists, but I am surprised at the amount of vandalism this article gets. This, however, is not an issue, for vandalism is promptly reverted.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): Yes
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions): Yes
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Article approved with no revision required. hare j 23:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): Yes
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions): Yes
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Article approved with no revision required. hare j 23:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail: Article approved with no revision required. hare j 23:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)