Talk:USS Balch (DD-50)/GA1

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

Hi there, I am happy to tell you that this article has passed GA without the need for any further improvement. Listed below is information on how the article fared against the good article criteria. I know that this review may seem cursory, but I have read it thoroughly and I genuinely have no additional questions or comments, it is a very good article.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * A very minor thing, but Lord Charles Beresford had been made a baron by October 1916, and therefore the correct form of address should be Lord Beresford (without the Charles). --Jackyd101 (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * It is stable.
 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:

Thankyou and congratulations, an excellent addition to Wikipedia:Good Articles. All the best.