Talk:Trobairitz/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * b (MoS):
 * I removed the improvement tag as there had been no discussion and it seemed unneccasry. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * a (major aspects):
 * b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * A well referenced and interesting article. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * A well referenced and interesting article. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * A well referenced and interesting article. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * A well referenced and interesting article. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:05, 19 July 2009 (UTC)