Talk:Strensham services/GA2

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


 * Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

GA reveiw
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I would like to thank you for appreciating the work that I have put into this, and in the past week all the work you have put into it yourself to bring it that last little mile :) I feel the need to dig out an appropriate barnstar here. Jenuk1985  |  Talk  22:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)