GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:George H. Hobson/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WikiOriginal-9 (talk · contribs) 06:05, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Notes

That's all I think. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 06:20, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All points have been addressed. Passing the article. Nice work! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 20:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]