Talk:Randolph, Tennessee/GA2

GA Review

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

starting GAreview.Pyrotec (talk) 20:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

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:

   Well illustrated

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   I've read the article in depth and also looked at the comments/discussions in GA/1. I'm satisfied that this article meeting the requirements of GA.

Congratulations on the quality of the article. I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I appreciate your evaluation of the article. doxTxob \ ^talk 05:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)