Talk:Tickle Cock Bridge/GA1

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 10:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 10:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

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:


 * Interestingly, I watched the "Kevin McCloud and the Big Town Plan" broadcasts and I don't particularly "remember" the "old structure (without its roof)" in your first photograph. The second picture is a bit more familiar; but the one I do remember is the one "with the roof one" shown in ref 1. I think you aught to retitle that first picture to make it clear that the roof has gone; and, even better, show a picture with the roof on (if there is one to hand).


 * Other than that, there is not much more I can say. You have a GA, congratulations on acheiving the standard. Pyrotec (talk) 19:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)