Talk:SMS Monarch/GA1

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 07:57, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

: After a few minor grammatical corrections, mostly in punctuation, I feel that the prose of the article, as well as its general layout, complies with guidelines satisfactorily. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

: The article makes frequent citations to several reliable, third-party sources. Nothing in the content resembles original research. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)
 * (c)

: The article appears to cover all aspects of the topic for which reliable information could be located. All information on the topic appears encyclopedically relevant. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

. In my review of the content, I did not detect any bias towards or against the subject. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC) . Due to its recent inclusion in Wikipedia, the immediately seen revisions in the article's history log go back to its creation, and none indicate that any edit warring has taken place on this article. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC) : The three images used in the article are public domain, so there is no copyright issue involved. They are well-captioned and serve important informative purposes in the article. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

After carefully reading the article over, and making minor adjustments, I feel that it is ready for inclusion amongst the War and military GAs. Congratulations! Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)