Talk:MV New Flame/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Not encyclopedic in style, especially the last few paragraphs in the Recovery efforts section.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Numerous citations missing.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Not enough details on the captain's arrest. Possible disaster effects should be merged into recovery efforts as little environmental damage was suffered.

   B. Focused:

   How did the collision happen?

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:

Concerns not addressed, so delisting. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)