Talk:Paul McDermott/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Successful good article nomination
[edit]I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of September 7, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: An easy and enjoyable read, could perhaps later use some copyediting and a peer review, but is certainly pretty well written.
- 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout to WP:RS sources satisfying WP:V.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Covers multiple aspects of the individual's life and accomplishments in some breadth.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Appears to be written in a neutral tone.
- 5. Article stability? No conflicts in a check of the talk page, no other problems seen in the edit history going back over 2 months.
- 6. Images?: 3 images used, one is from Wikimedia Commons with WP:OTRS confirmation, can't get much better than that, and the other 2 both have adequate fair use rationales provided on the image pages.
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— Cirt (talk) 23:49, 7 September 2008 (UTC)