Talk:Regenbald/GA1

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

Reviewer: maclean (talk) 05:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see What is a good article?)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * 2) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * One image - WPCommons hosted Creative Commons image.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Looks good. I don't see any problems here. maclean (talk) 05:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * One image - WPCommons hosted Creative Commons image.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Looks good. I don't see any problems here. maclean (talk) 05:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)