Jump to content

Talk:Organisation of Women of African and Asian Descent

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Requested move 7 May 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move (non-admin closure). feminist 09:59, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Organization of Women of African and Asian DescentOrganisation of Women of African and Asian Descent – British spelling. MassiveEartha (talk) 06:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Feminist Library Wikithon

[edit]

This page was edited as part of a Feminist Library, London, Wikithon on 6 October. Please be patient with new editors, and we're grateful if you can explain any problems/ areas for improvement. Thank you! Medievalfran (talk) 08:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Organisation of Women of African and Asian Descent/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Medievalfran (talk · contribs) 13:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: FuzzyMagma (talk · contribs) 09:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:

Quick fail, per WP:GAFAIL, no. 1 and 3

  1. Pass or Fail:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.