Talk:Ho Chi Minh City/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comments
[edit]- File:Sfone logo.png - File:Vinaphone logo.png, and File:HoChiMinhCityFC.png need Non-free media use rationale for inclusion in this article
- One image is captioned Saigon Port should be Ho Chi Minh for consistancy
- There are way too many images at the end of the article
- Text squeezed betwen two images
- There is an almost total lack of references and should only be start class not B
- Bare url references used
- Wikipedia used as a reference
- Web references without access dates
- Ref 13 "Yearbook of the Encyclopedia Americana (2006)". p.175. needs adding to a bibliography
To allow work on the article which I do not believe can be completed in teh time I am quickfailing. Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)