Talk:Walter Ohmsen/GA1

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

Reviewer: auntieruth (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * I've made some copy edits. please confirm that what I've written is what you meant.
 * Checked! Looks good MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Nice job on this. I've added a sentence to the lead to establish why this particular man was notable, not only for his decorations. In a couple other places, there was some verb and word choice issue, please check it.  Otherwise, I'm ready to pass.  auntieruth (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good, Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Nice job on this. I've added a sentence to the lead to establish why this particular man was notable, not only for his decorations. In a couple other places, there was some verb and word choice issue, please check it.  Otherwise, I'm ready to pass.  auntieruth (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good, Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good, Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)