Talk:State Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Croatia/GA1

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 11:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

This looks an interesting article. I will start a review shortly. simongraham (talk) 11:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking time to review this article. In the meantime, I have requested a copyedit at the WP:GOCE/REQ and I believe the article might be copyedited shortly to address any grammar or similar issues. Cheers.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It is a pleasure. Thank you for the update. In that case, I will wait for the copyedit to be complete before undertaking my review to avoid unnecessary duplication. Please ping me when you would like me to take a look. simongraham (talk) 18:16, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The GOCE copyedit has just been completed. Could you please resume the GAR?--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:42, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Review
The article is clearly written and covers an interesting topic. It is stable, 86.4% of authorship is one user, User:Tomobe03. It is currently ranked a B class article within the Croatia, Military history and Yugoslavia Wikiprojects.

The six good article criteria:
 * 1) It is reasonable well written
 * the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct following WP:GOCE.
 * it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and words to watch. For example, the article contains the word to watch popular, but used appropriately in the context.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable
 * it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * all inline citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged.
 * It contains no original research.
 * It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage
 * It addresses the main aspects of the topic.
 * iI stays ffocused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
 * 1) It has a neutral point of view
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
 * 1) It is stable
 * it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * Images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content.
 * Images are (relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. The article does not include a logo in the Infobox but this is not a GA criteria.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Congratulations. This article meets the criteria to be a Good Article. I read that you are looking to take it to become Featured Article. Good luck.
 * Pass/Fail: Pass -- simongraham (talk) 05:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail: Pass -- simongraham (talk) 05:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Could you please list the article at the WP:GA/H, it appears that step is missing. I can update the class ratings at the talk page, but I'm not sure it would be ok for me as the nominator to list the article among GA's myself. Cheers--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)