Talk:Siege of Melos/GA1

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 10:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Starting review
I will take this on. Should be able to start shortly. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Basic GA criteria

 * 1) Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
 * 2) Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
 * 3) Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
 * 4) Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
 * 5) Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch (e.g., "awesome" and "stunning").
 * 6) Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction. Not applicable.
 * 7) Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation. Not applicable.
 * 8) Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations.
 * 9) All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
 * 10) All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
 * 11) Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
 * 12) No original research.
 * 13) No copyright violations or plagiarism.
 * 14) Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
 * 15) Neutral.
 * 16) Stable.
 * 17) Illustrated, if possible.
 * 18) Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

This passes easily and I won't beat about the bush. I'm familiar with Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War so I already knew about this siege and its shameful aftermath. The article is very well written and taken from impeccable sources. It is concise, entirely within scope and to the point. It's very good. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:30, 26 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your review. It's about time someone got to this!  The backlog in the GA process is huge. Kurzon (talk) 15:35, 26 May 2019 (UTC)