Talk:Pipe rolls/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Starting GA review.Pyrotec (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A interesting article

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

   It would be useful to add (if possible) an image that shows one of these documents rolled up in "pipe" form. At present there is no visual "evidence" to corroborate the statement that they look like pipes.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations, I'm awarding this article GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 16:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)