Talk:United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri/GA1

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * 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:
 * Pass GA.
 * 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:
 * Pass GA.
 * Pass GA.

I encourage you to improve this article. As of now, it is just barely a GA or not a GA. Some things to consider are:

notable cases. This is the authors' opinion or original research. This is not to say the opinion is not valid.

There is not a good balance between explaining the federal court system in general and what is different about Missouri.

There's also conflicting information. SE division mentioned but also the S division.

TeacherA (talk) 01:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)