Talk:Rudolf Wolters/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

--Grahame (talk) 13:48, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.
 * 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):
 * Obviously it would be desirable to have a picture of Wolters (I looked in commons without success).
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Very fine article. By the way, the comment about the work of Task Force for Reconstruction Planning applying to actual postwar reconstruction presumably applied more to West Germany the East Germany.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Obviously it would be desirable to have a picture of Wolters (I looked in commons without success).
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Very fine article. By the way, the comment about the work of Task Force for Reconstruction Planning applying to actual postwar reconstruction presumably applied more to West Germany the East Germany.