Talk:Chlemoutsi/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 21:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Will review over the weekend.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:29, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment I copyedited per my copyediting disclaimer, down to Keep. These are my edits. Concerning: "Andravida, some 13 kilometres (8.1 mi) away, and the Principality's largest port and town, Glarentza (c. 5 kilometres (3.1 mi)).": avoid "))". Also: "some" and "c." suggest it's approximate, but "8.1" and "3.1" suggest it's not. - Dank (push to talk) 14:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

• Finished copyediting. - Dank (push to talk) 21:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
• When you're done here, I think it's good to go for an A-class nomination. - Dank (push to talk) 14:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Lead and infobox

• No coordinates?
• Add convert template for 226 m

History

• "13 km (about 8 mi) away, and the Principality's largest port and town, Glarentza (c. 5 km or 3 mi). " use Template:Convert.
• A. Bon -who is he??

Outer ward

• Add convert templates for 5 and 10 metres.

Keep

• Why "apparently judged"?

@Cplakidas: Looks in good shape, just those very minor things and I'll pass it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for your work! I made the required changes. Thanks to Dank for the thumbs up, and over to you dear Dr. Blofeld: other than technical issues and GA requirements, how do you rate it? You have more experience with articles on towns etc, so in your view, is anything lacking, should I add more detail/context/something else? Constantine ✍ 16:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, you know what is available for it, but it certainly covers what is necessary to pass GA which I will do now. You might though add a bit to the lead on the architecture just so it covers the whole article though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: