Talk:Branislav Djurdjev/GA1
GA Review
{{atopg
| status =
| result = Passed. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
}}
{{Good article tools}}
Nominator: {{User|Krisitor}} 19:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: History6042 (talk · contribs) 17:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. It must meet all 6 criteria to pass. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:I fixed up some text that seemed a bit unnatural, but other than that I think this is good to go. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::I think I'm going to pass this, good job. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
| class="wikitable" style="text-align:left" |
| style="vertical-align:top;"
! width="30" | Rate ! width="300"| Attribute ! | Review Comment |
| style="vertical-align:top;"
| colspan="3" | 1. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1}}: {{GATable/item|1a|y|There aren't any grammatical errors I could find that I didn't fix. }} {{GATable/item|1b|y|It does.}} |
| style="vertical-align:top;"
| colspan="3" | 2. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2}}, as shown by a source spot-check: {{GATable/item|2a|y|There is a reflist template. }} {{GATable/item|2b|y|All statements (not in the lead but it doesn't need them) have citations. }} {{GATable/item|2c|y|I found no original research. }} {{GATable/item|2d|y|Earwig found nothing wrong. }} |
| style="vertical-align:top;"
| colspan="3" | 3. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3}}: {{GATable/item|3a|y|This covers everything I could find. }} {{GATable/item|3b|y|The article doesn't seem overly long/detailed. }} {{GATable/item|4|y|Couldn't find any biased text }} {{GATable/item|5|y|There haven't been any reverts since January 5, 2024. }} |
| style="vertical-align:top;"
| colspan="3" | 6. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6}}: {{GATable/item|6a|y|The images all seem good and the only one that's copyrighted has a good fair use rational. }} {{GATable/item|6b|y|They also all have captions. }} {{GATable/item|7|y| }} |
{{abot}}