Talk:Revenue stamps of Malta/GA1

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 17:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Starting review
Hello, I will review this article. I have submitted Bury F.C. for review and I agree that I should review two other articles myself to help with the backlog. I hope to commence the review shortly. Thank you. No Great Shaker (talk) 17:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The article was created in February 2012 and is now 14.8kb after less than 100 edits. Good_article_criteria is inapplicable here and a full review can proceed. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:15, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments
The article is certainly well written. It has good, readable English and only a handful of minor edits have been needed to correct spelling and grammar.

I have already questioned the pound denomination abbreviation as £ or Lm, never £m. In any case, should usage of abbreviations be consistent throughout? There are now eight £ and two Lm so perhaps those two should be changed to £? Please confirm.

The intro has two paragraphs, which is fine for 15kb, and it seems to summarise the overall content very well. The article complies with the standard layout given at the MOS page. There is no need for any hatnotes, it is non-fiction, there are no awesomes and there is no need for any embedded lists.

Breadth of coverage is sufficient and the article uses a summary style throughout, giving you all the information without delving into the depths of minor detail; and it stays within scope. I find it both informative and interesting.

Neutrality and stability are fine. The article is written objectively and, as the information is essentially factual, there are no controversies to be balanced. Where politics does arise, it is again handled objectively.

There are six relevant images of subject-matter stamps. As far as I can tell, they are all public domain and are certainly tagged as such. I cannot see any problem with any of them being depicted in the article. They are certainly fair use at the very least. The captions are all apt and explanatory.

I still need to look at the citations and consider verification throughout, although I can see no immediate issues. I'll come back when I've had time to do this. I hope that's okay. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 21:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review :) Regarding the pound issue, for the pre-decimal era (until 1972), Malta used the Pound sterling and the £ sign was used. From the adoption of the Maltese pound/lira in 1972, the £m (or £M) symbol was initially used, before being replaced in the 1980s with the Lm (or LM) symbol. For the article I used whatever was used on the stamps themselves. For example, the Airport Charge stamp issued in 1975 had a "£M" symbol, and the one issued in 1988 had a "LM" symbol (you can see images of the stamps in question here - first two stamps in the page). --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 11:12, 5 March 2019 (UTC)